A lot of gravity assist maneuvers. It is (energy wise) very difficult to get to put a probe in mercury's orbit, first you have to do a lot of braking to put it into an elliptical orbit to reach mercury's orbit then another lot of braking to make it match mercury's orbit then more braking to put it into (some sort) of elliptical orbit AROUND mercury then (optional) more braking to "circularize" your orbit around mercury!
I think energetically speaking it's about as difficult to send a probe to Mercury as it is to Jupiter even though Jupiter is much farther away. So in order to not have to use a huge (expensive booster), the probe does a bunch of gravity assists by sling-shotting near Venus, Mercury and maybe even the earth. This saves a LOT of fuel but adds a LOT of time (otherwise as you probably guessed it would've gotten there years earlier).
I know this problem has (probably) been satisfactorily addressed but if one were to use such a super fast drive for an application that had extremely heavy usage (swap space for the OS or an program like Photoshop) wouldn't it cause those sectors to be read/written to many many times very quickly? Doesn't each "cell" have a limited number off times it can be accessed before it fails? (on the order of 100,000 i think). And wouldn't that case the drive to fail (sooner rather than later because it is so fast)?
Again, I'm sure the SSD drive manufacturers have looked at this problem very closely, I'm just concerned that's all. After all, even if your computer made only one error every billion instructions that would mean it would break down in less than a second!
Otherwise, I'm getting one of the 512GB drives for a smokin' fast laptop drive so I boot up lightening fast! (Time can never be recovered especially for an old fart like me).
I feel dirty about commenting on an article from Fox News but it seems that there was some concern in the U.S. recently about a new long range high speed anti-ship missile which was deemed a possible "Carrier Killer". In addition to its long range, the high speed would make it difficult for the terminal defenses (Phalanx guns) to knock the incoming missile(s) out of the sky in the few seconds they would be in range.*
Of course, for a laser, a few seconds is an eternity. Probably the big problem would be to ensure the beam would remain on the dwell point long enough for it to burn through the casing. But if these things have good enough targeting to knock down an ascending ICBM from several hundred kilometers away (as in the air force version), I can't imagine it would be a big problem for a ship based version to take out an approaching (read range getting smaller) missile within a few kilometers (or less!). (I realize that a boost phase ICBM is a "fragile" target compared to a possibly hardened warhead with ablative shielding but remember the inverse-squared law! And the vastly easier targeting at short range against a hot infrared target instead of a cold body in space).
This is a productive use of the hundreds of megawatts of electric power already on tap in a nuclear powered carrier. Against heavier targets (ships) the navy will use rail-guns, also a great user of electric power. (I would imagine the laser would overheat before it could cut through the hull of a warship).
*The Chinese could defeat this (and probably any defensive system) using nuclear warheads on their anti-ship missiles but they would risk a strategic nuclear exchange.
If the voyage will be centuries long (or longer!) duration as is what we can expect for interstellar travels in the forseeable future, send embryos. They can be reliably frozen for long periods of time and, being very small, could be well shielded. Of course this presumes some sort of artificial womb (perhaps a placenta grown from thawed out stem cells?) and then artificial "parenting" system to guide, protect and educate the young until adulthood (now THAT would be a real test of applied psychology!).
I seem to remember coming across this idea in a later edition of one of Arthur C. Clarke's books, "The Songs of Distant Earth". SPOILER ALERT. The earth based civilization, having determined that the sun would explode in 1000 years starts sending many of these "seeding" probes to suitable star systems in the hopes that a few would survive. Despite the long odds against them (particularly because the human infants who are raised by machines grow up severely maladjusted) some survive and eventually develop flourishing colonies. Centuries later, shortly before the sun's demise the earth civilization discovers a way to harness the zero-point energy(?) and is able to send huge ships that can travel at an appreciable fraction of the speed of light (even so, the crew and colonists are still put into suspended animation). One of these ships suffers a breakdown near a previously established colony and puts in for repairs.
IANAnE (Epidemologist) but I would think that the likelihood of creating virii that would be invulnerable to the vaccine would depend on whether there would be selection pressure to make it so. While the virii are being transmitted from human to human there is obvious selection pressure for those strains that are resistant. However I believe that most flu epidemics originate in animal (other species) hosts which serve as a long-term reservoir. It is when they cross the species barrier (typically in south-east Asia where humans and domesticated animals live in intimate proximity) that they infect humans. They become a serious threat when they gain the ability to be transmitted from human to human but (I believe) the strain is wiped out once the pandemic has run its course (and everyone who has been exposed has either been vaccinated, been infected and developed immunity or, is dead).
So it seems that this vaccine would still remain effective because there is no selection pressure against the virii in their animal hosts. Only those virii that had managed to infect humans would be selected against and since these do not re-contribute to the base genetic pool there would not be any pressure for the virii in the animal hosts to evolve an immunity to the vaccine. Of course it is possible that once the virii has managed to start spreading human to human that that strain would evolve immunity to the vaccine. But since it, like most (all?) flu strains would be wiped out at the end of the epidemic, the genetic makeup of the population would not have changed.
This presumes that overzealous farmers do not use this vaccine to cut down on the losses of their livestock. Then it IS possible (likely? inevitable?) that immunity will spread, rendering the vaccine useless. Perhaps legislation is in order to prevent the (ab)use of the vaccine in the way that anti-biotics have been heavily used by the livestock industry to boost animal size.
(I could very well be making some huge conceptual errors due to ignorance. Professional input is very much welcomed!)
Hopefully there will be a lot of (good) jokes about the ability of the average consumer to "stomach" (ha ha) these critters.
However "unappetizing" that prospect may be, why not give them to Fido or Socks? From what I've seen of dog/cat food, it is so heavily processesd, flavored and dyed that they, being unable to read the labels, may not be able to tell the difference. I don't know what other domesticated/farmed animals are fed animal protein (fish farms?) but the amount could be significant.
Just trying to take a "bite" out of the problem of global warming.
If free radicals were responsible for (a large part) of aging then blueberry farmers would routinely live to be more than 100. Blueberries supposedly have the highest amount of anti-oxidants (by weight? volume? serving size?) of any food.
will want to be going to Mono lake and getting samples.
Is there an ecosystem? Predators, Herbivores, Carnivores, Autotrophes etc.? Is the primary energy source the sun or some chemical reaction? How do they keep the "real" biosphere from taking all of there resources (maybe just the high concentrations of arsenic).
In 10 seconds I came up with these questions, and I'm just a wannabe scientist! I'm sure every microbiologist (and geneticist, molecular biologist, systems biologist, taxonomist, etc.) would love to do some field research. If this is the only spot ON EARTH that we know of that these things exist shouldn't we be VERY CAREFUL?! (like treating an extraterrestrial probe).
Of course, that's if this rumor is true. It's beautiful/wonderful to think that it is isn't it?
The solid rocket boosters have always seemed to be the most dangerous piece of the "stack". The problem is, YOU CAN't SWITCH THEM OFF. Because of this, I believe there is literally no way out for the shuttle crew while they are firing. I think Wehrner Vom Braun refused to design man rated vehicles with a solid rocket stage (he mustn't have been responsible for the Redstone I guess). Even the Russians used liquid fueled strap-on boosters in their Buran.
Of course if the shuttle had been properly funded it would've had a liquid first stage (maybe even winged so it could fly back). But that was in an alternate universe I guess. I know that Constellation would've had an escape tower that would be (hopefully) be able to pull it away from the main vehicle but still it would be much safer if the main vehicle's engines were OFF at that point.
You must live on a different planet because I live IN VIETNAM and when I go to coffee shops (no, they're not techie coffee shops in any way) I'll usually see one or two people preening with one.
The per capita income in Vietnam is about $2K/yr., Apple computers are very rare and iPads are not even sold here yet (all the ones here are expensively imported) and probably won't be for awhile (Vietnam is way way down on Apple's list of markets).
I just can't believe that in the Hi-Tech center of the universe SAN FRANCISCO, you've only seen 2-3 "in the wild". Either you're trolling or you don't get out of your mother's basement much. Maybe both.
If it has to be incredibly time sensitive to work why not use sound (ultra-sonic waves, like bats use) instead. This should reduce the time sensitivity requirements by many orders of magnitude. It will also reduce the resolution but considering that bats can catch insects in flight probably will still be good enough to "see" someone hiding behind a door.
Or perhaps they need a coherent (laser) beam of sound? Perhaps this can be engineered around. Might also be useful underwater.
"Frankly, I would love nothing better than an OS I could put on my parents' computers and not have to worry about them calling me a month later complaining about all the pop-ups and viruses they have. "
So why haven't you done the obvious and gotten them (or told them to get) a Mac?
They don't come with bloatware/crapware/shovelware and the number of viruses/worms IN THE WILD is vanishingly small. Let's go through your other objections point by point.
Confusing distress - keep up with the Apple update schedule and there's only one distro to worry about. Even if you don't want to pay the (reasonable) update fee (for Snow Leopard it was $29), Apple supports their previous releases for a couple of years for free and it is a very rare piece of software that will require the new update.
Poor documentation - well (for your parents at least) documentation is a non-issue because the Mac OS is so easy to use that most Macs ship with a tiny pamphlet. Of course for people who want to dig deeper well Macs have the slickest easy to use documents/help system around - they ARE the world leaders in desktop publishing/graphics.
Software, Software, Software - Don't know what kind of special software your mom uses but one would think unless she's an engineer or some other sort of technologist, there will likely be a Mac version. If not, she could always use Parallels or VMware which are very large commercially supported environments to run windows software. For the rest of us, most (but not all) PC software has a native Mac equivalent like Microsoft's office suite.
Little support (if not openly hostile) - Not only will your parents find a lot of people who also own Macs to provide day to day support (like how do I download a YouTube video?) but for anything more involved there's always the formal Apple Care. Don't forget the really really nice option of making an on-line reservation at the local Apple store and then meeting with an Apple "Genius" IN PERSON who will spend AS LONG AS IS NECESSARY (my experience) to figure out what is wrong! I don't know if they are, in fact, geniuses but they do seem to be much much better trained (and have access to much better resources) than your typical big box electronics store sales guy. Also I've never been asked if my Mac was still under warranty if it did not require an actual repair!
Ways of doing things that are confusing to a Windows user - Macs ARE different and may be little confusing to the uninitiated. That said, their ease of use is legendary (do we really have to go over this) and once your parents adapt to it, they will find that the Macintosh way is much more consistent than on any other platform.
Before I retired my computer graphics company had a mixed network of Macs, Windows and SGIs and even though I had to keep them all going (and train people etc.) you can guess which ones I recommended to MY parents. The only reason why I might think you're still going the PC route is because of the alleged "Apple Tax". While some might say that is because of the superior quality of construction, even if it exists ask yourself: how much is your time worth? Even though I'm retired I still REFUSE to spend a day reformatting/installing a system because of some virus, life is too short (and getting shorter). So unless your religious convictions demand otherwise you'll find that "once you try Mac you'll never go back!".:)
* One exception that I make to this above argument is: it actually depends on which country you're living in. I'm retired in Vietnam where the per capital income is in the (very) low thousands/year. In this case the "Apple tax" superior hardware or not, is just too high a price to pay for the locals so it makes more sense for them to install their pirated copy of windows and office suite that they paid maybe 2-3 dollars for. But in any developed country I don't see why people are using windows as their "home" computer.
"According to the team's calculations, 300 meters (984 feet) of copper wire, attached to a two-meter-wide (6.6-foot-wide) receiver and a 10-meter (32.8-foot) sail, would generate enough power for 1,000 homes.
A satellite with a 1,000-meter (3,280-foot) cable and a sail 8,400 kilometers (5,220 miles) across, placed at roughly the same orbit, would generate one billion billion gigawatts of power."
Okay according to google the average us home uses 920kWh/mo. (energy) or a little over a kilowatt (power). (Sounds about right, that's like running a single heavy appliance continuously 24 hours/day). So 1,000 homes is about a megawatt. But the article claims that by scaling up the sail by a factor of a about a trillion (from 10meters/side to about 10,000kilometers/side) increases the power recovered by a factor of a BILLION trillion (that's what a billion billion GIGAwatts is to a mere megawatt).
I think somewhere along the line somebody added an extra billion.
Even so, the claims are still a little hard to take, that implies a "sail" only a bit larger than ten kilometers on a side could power all of earth's homes. (Assume that there are 1 billion homes and that each uses the US amount; 10 sq. kilometers is a million times larger than 10 sq. meters). So why are they talking about a sail 8,400 kilometers sq.?
The numbers just don't add (multiply actually) up. I think that the first mistake/exaggeration comes from the claim that a 10 sq. meter sail could power 1000 homes. That's much more energy than could be gotten from a solar array; total solar power is around 1kW/sq. meter, so a 10 sq. meter solar cell at 100% efficiency would "only" generate 100kWs, enough for 100 homes not 1000). Anyway, these mistakes are annoying because this seems like it could be a promising technology if only, as a previous poster mentioned, to power our space based equipment. However, does it really seem likely that the big old fusion reactor in the sky (the sun) is putting out orders of magnitudes more energy in the form of the solar wind than it is through plain old radiation (sunlight)? Don't you think the nuclear physicists would have wondered where all the energy is going? Don't you think all the spacecraft flight planners would have wondered why their spacecraft were literally being blown off course by a force much stronger than solar radiation which they already take into account?
Anyway, maybe I've made an obvious mistake in my calculations, it's late in my part of the world and I need to sleep.
Back in the days when I used to design theme parks (fun profession!) I used to work with a company (Spectra F/X) that made these.
Most spectacularly GIANT versions of these flame tornados were used in Universal Studio's attraction "Backdraft" based on the movie of the same name. At least that what I think it was named; the title was about the hazard a firemen faced when entering a burning building that suddenly gets an influx of more oxygen. Anyway, the attraction is pretty impressive lots of real, hot fire and exploding oil drums (relatively) near you. If you're in Los Angeles you might want to go see it. Even though you definitely feel the heat from the flames and explosions, I think the safety record is quite good (haven't heard of any accidents).
The company designed and built this and a lot of other flame effects. I got to see one of their flame tornados being built and tested out in the cavernous workshop; i wished i had taken a closer look at this engineered device, it looked like a turbine and was roughly the size of a large trash can. (Believe me, it was engineered, this company built a lot of safety critical stuff in its day). A long time ago it won the Oscar for special effects for the movie "Ben Hur". Unfortunately it went under about 10 tears ago.
If any of the Spectra F/X guys are reading this, I'd like to say hi! (TK in CGI).
A couple of reviews of Flash running on Android 2.2 have come out. I submitted this story awhile ago to the editors but for some reason (anti-Apple bias?) they chose not to run it.
"Adobe needs to have a better answer to whether or not Flash is still relevant in a world where other technologies have rapidly started displacing it. Based on my early experience with Flash Player 10.1 for mobile, it could soon join the floppy drive in the tech graveyard, something else Steve Jobs helped kill."
and
"While in theory Flash video might be a competitive advantage for Android users, in practice it’s difficult to imagine anyone actually trying to watch non-optimized web video on an Android handset, all of which makes one believe that maybe Steve Jobs was right to eschew Flash in lieu of HTML5 on the iPhone and iPad."
So is it better to have a sucky experience or none at all?
One advantage to being on, or in "orbit" around an asteroid or other small body (like the moons of mars), is that it is relatively quick and easy to change and hold one's position relative to that body. So if the astronauts see a solar flare coming they just move into the shadow and hang out there for the few hours it takes for it to pass. No expensive delta-v, no digging in the dirt.
Of course Arthur C. Clarke foresaw this in his story about a visit to the asteroid Icarus.
I have been on slashdot years and years and this is the first time I have ever mentioned any non-professional or non-technical activities or interests of mine (feel free to verify this by looking at my previous postings; but I warn you it will take a while, I've got hundreds). However when the article directly states that iPad users are lacking in "altruism or kindness" I feel I must mention my own example however anecdotal (as I recognize). It's not just the article that demands a rebuttal, another poster "1%warren" asked:
"I haven't seen any iPad users mention anything at all about altruism and kindness in their attempts to refute the 'selfish elite'" tag"
You'll see his posting a page or two below if you scroll down.
The iPad is immaterial (i actually was a C.S. Major in college, am proficient in Unix and in fact used SGIs for years. Yes I'm old, like I said I'm retired.). I'm reacting against the sheer amount of hate expressed in these posts. I've never seen anything like it (except, as I mentioned, in racial epithets). I would be equally upset if someone hated me because I drove a Mercedes (which I do not but it is sad that I have to make such a comment) or because I like the color blue or whatnot. For a "news" site like slashdot to promote such a thing is unconscionable, it is like having the Klu Klux Klan make a presentation at a NAACP meeting.
All you have to do is read the other posts to see the venom being espoused. Who benefits from giving hate a voice?
You know, cleaning the toilets at this school is not exactly what I would call pitying them.
I'm retired here, it's a lot cheaper than the states (I think you were implying that I am really rich). I didn't come here to do good works or anything but I've got a lot of free time and I figured I should do something. A Buddhist guy came around from this organization (www.tzuchi.org) and I decided to help. If I were back in the states I'd probably be doing something for the Red Cross. I've done volunteer work all my life (I had a real job so it was VOLUNTEER), have you?
By the way, while many Vietnamese are poor, there is a very unequal wealth distribution. So you'll see a lot of Merecedes and some Bentleys and MayBachs. I don't even have a car! (but I do have an iPad). Different priorities I guess.
I called the maid's kid a "dumbshit" because if I repeated what his family calls him, I'd be censored! This kid has stolen from his own family, lost money through gambling, married, quickly got his wife pregnant and now with an unborn child SHE wants a divorce. How do I know all this? Because after 3years of living here and moving from place to place they still work for me. I guess they like me.
I have a maid, guilty as charged. While I guess I could clean my own place (as I mentioned I have lots of time), I'm lazy and I'm keeping her gainfully employed. Do I pay her a lot? No, just a bit more than the going rate, but I've always kept it in the back of my mind that if there was ever a disaster I'd help her family out (not that I ever told her). Does that make me an elitist snob?
How does my argument (which anyway I said, as it feels to "me"... "as a minority") make Apple users look like a bunch of "mindless" "toadying" "zealots"? (which are of course more choice words). Or perhaps your description of me as a "fanboi" qualifies this as an ad-hominem attack?
To be sure the consequences of being branded a fanboi are nothing in comparison to racist speech. However the same KIND of attack and thinking (or lack thereof) is what I'm pointing out (and you are reinforcing). You can probably find a study to support anything (my favorite is the one showing lower IQs in the "Red" states); what is irresponsible is a respectable(?) news site bringing up such a study for discussion. Sort of like if they brought up a study saying race X had lower IQ points than race Y.
Seems the main point is not to enlighten but to generate discord for higher ratings.
You know it feels to me, that as a minority (racial) some people at Slashdot seems enjoy inciting anti-apple people using the kinds of hate speech that other people once (and still occasionally is) used to describe us minorities. Back then there were plenty of "studies" that purported to show how various minorities were inferior in intelligence, moral character, physical attributes, etc. I guess in Slashdot's case the key phrases would be "selfish", "elite" and previously "fanbois", "Stockholm syndrome sufferers", etc.
If the only purpose of journalism is to now provoke controversy (and worse) for the sake of ad revenue, then my respect for the profession has vanished. (No, I don't consider Glenn Beck and Limbaugh journalists). While Slashdot may not aspire to "only print all the (tech) news that's fit to print", it does claim to publish "stuff that matters". I fail to see how this posting reaches even that vague standard.
And yes, this was sent from my iPad. (also, as a matter of anecdotal record, I live in Vietnam and this weekend I was at a volunteer site where they're building a school for the children of extremely poor parents. Many of the the parents (and kids!) work in brick making factories and have severe respiratory ailments from the dust. I also just gave my maid enough money to pay for the medical costs of her husband who appears to have had a stroke. Their dumbshit son lost a lot of money betting on the world cup thus wiping out their family's meager savings.)
Another thing to consider is that there IS a virtually unlimited pollution free (sort-of) power source on some of the Navy's larger vessels. It is of course the nuclear reactors on the big carriers (and maybe some of the cruisers?). I can't imagine that the power source capable of pushing a close to 100,000 ton ship through the ocean at 40 knots is going to have trouble powering a few measly lasers (either Kw or Mw). Even if it causes the ship to slow down a bit, that would hardly seem to make a difference to a missile coming in at Mach 5.
I believe that this is one of the justifications the Navy has used to making more "electric" ships where even in smaller vessels the propeller is not driven directly by the engine. Instead there is a gas turbine that runs a generator which then powers electric motors. In addition to thus being able to use the propulsive power to run electrically powered weapons (not just lasers, think rail guns), the power is also storable in batteries allowing for surges and the ability to run more quietly. There is even the possibility of more exotic propulsion systems being used (magnetohydrodynamics? the "crawler" in the movie "The Hunt for Red October"). Another benefit is that this power train, like a hybrid car, is more energy efficient (although it might be more picky about fuel). There are other applications made possible if boats are electrically powered (such as being possible electric generators for temporary onshore encampments much as like you can use a hybrid to light your house during a black-out) but you get the picture.
So, if in fact, the Navy will be using electrically powered lasers (free-electron?) the infrastructure should already be in place. In fact, one other intriguing possibly is the placement of such weapons on the (nuclear powered) fast attack submarines defending each carrier group. Not only could they provide another "picket line" defense that the enemy could not observe; they might be able to fire their lasers while remaining largely submerged by using the optics already present in the periscope. Finally, if these are free-electron lasers and thus tunable to blue-green wavelengths; they could conceivably be used as u nderwater defensive weapons eithe-r by directly detonating $@incoming torpedos (or even Russia's rumored underwater supercavitating "rockets") or -(,by "jamming" the hom ing sonar by $@/disrupting the acoustic environment through cavitation (boiling) and other effects. Of course if any of these more spec:@"'vulative ideas had an y credence to them, it is highly unli!?.kely that this information would be allowe:);d to be posted on the Inter...
"...we need to do a better job taking care of our early iPhone customers as we aggressively go after new ones with a lower price. Our early customers trusted us, and we must live up to that trust with our actions in moments like these.
Therefore, we have decided to offer every iPhone customer who purchased an iPhone from either Apple or AT&T, and who is not receiving a rebate or any other consideration, a $100 store credit towards the purchase of any product at an Apple Retail Store or the Apple Online Store. Details are still being worked out and will be posted on Apple's website next week. Stay tuned."
and
"We apologize for disappointing some of you, and we are doing our best to live up to your high expectations of Apple," Jobs wrote.
First off, thanks for at least acknowledging the possibility that you might be wrong and that Apple may, in fact, try to address this issue. Too many fanbois have ruined this part of Slasdot by spewing vitriol and what can only be described as hate. No light, just heat.
I think that Apple will address the issue because this special conference is being called on extremely short notice (with MacNN calling it an "emergency press conference"). Having not seen the actual wording, I can't say for certain but again due to the short time-scale (less than 48 hours) it wouldn't seem to be just another announcement of a product update.
Also you are incorrect in asserting that Apple doesn't "admit mistakes". The most recent example that I can recall is the $200 rebates they gave everyone who bought an original iPhone. As you recall, that occurred after the angry groundswell from early adopters who had purchased it a few months before for a couple hundred dollars more. I do not remember whether they gave hints that they might do this or if they called a "special press conference" on short notice.
On the other hand, the market seems to think you're right! Last I checked Apple was down 1.5 percent, roughly double the overall market. So people seem to think Apple will have no or an innefectual response.
Guess if I really believe this conference will solve things I should buy Apple stock!:). And you should sell short!
Slashdot Mirror
A lot of gravity assist maneuvers. It is (energy wise) very difficult to get to put a probe in mercury's orbit, first you have to do a lot of braking to put it into an elliptical orbit to reach mercury's orbit then another lot of braking to make it match mercury's orbit then more braking to put it into (some sort) of elliptical orbit AROUND mercury then (optional) more braking to "circularize" your orbit around mercury!
I think energetically speaking it's about as difficult to send a probe to Mercury as it is to Jupiter even though Jupiter is much farther away. So in order to not have to use a huge (expensive booster), the probe does a bunch of gravity assists by sling-shotting near Venus, Mercury and maybe even the earth. This saves a LOT of fuel but adds a LOT of time (otherwise as you probably guessed it would've gotten there years earlier).
I know this problem has (probably) been satisfactorily addressed but if one were to use such a super fast drive for an application that had extremely heavy usage (swap space for the OS or an program like Photoshop) wouldn't it cause those sectors to be read/written to many many times very quickly? Doesn't each "cell" have a limited number off times it can be accessed before it fails? (on the order of 100,000 i think). And wouldn't that case the drive to fail (sooner rather than later because it is so fast)?
Again, I'm sure the SSD drive manufacturers have looked at this problem very closely, I'm just concerned that's all. After all, even if your computer made only one error every billion instructions that would mean it would break down in less than a second!
Otherwise, I'm getting one of the 512GB drives for a smokin' fast laptop drive so I boot up lightening fast! (Time can never be recovered especially for an old fart like me).
I feel dirty about commenting on an article from Fox News but it seems that there was some concern in the U.S. recently about a new long range high speed anti-ship missile which was deemed a possible "Carrier Killer". In addition to its long range, the high speed would make it difficult for the terminal defenses (Phalanx guns) to knock the incoming missile(s) out of the sky in the few seconds they would be in range.*
Of course, for a laser, a few seconds is an eternity. Probably the big problem would be to ensure the beam would remain on the dwell point long enough for it to burn through the casing. But if these things have good enough targeting to knock down an ascending ICBM from several hundred kilometers away (as in the air force version), I can't imagine it would be a big problem for a ship based version to take out an approaching (read range getting smaller) missile within a few kilometers (or less!). (I realize that a boost phase ICBM is a "fragile" target compared to a possibly hardened warhead with ablative shielding but remember the inverse-squared law! And the vastly easier targeting at short range against a hot infrared target instead of a cold body in space).
This is a productive use of the hundreds of megawatts of electric power already on tap in a nuclear powered carrier. Against heavier targets (ships) the navy will use rail-guns, also a great user of electric power. (I would imagine the laser would overheat before it could cut through the hull of a warship).
*The Chinese could defeat this (and probably any defensive system) using nuclear warheads on their anti-ship missiles but they would risk a strategic nuclear exchange.
If the voyage will be centuries long (or longer!) duration as is what we can expect for interstellar travels in the forseeable future, send embryos. They can be reliably frozen for long periods of time and, being very small, could be well shielded. Of course this presumes some sort of artificial womb (perhaps a placenta grown from thawed out stem cells?) and then artificial "parenting" system to guide, protect and educate the young until adulthood (now THAT would be a real test of applied psychology!).
I seem to remember coming across this idea in a later edition of one of Arthur C. Clarke's books, "The Songs of Distant Earth". SPOILER ALERT. The earth based civilization, having determined that the sun would explode in 1000 years starts sending many of these "seeding" probes to suitable star systems in the hopes that a few would survive. Despite the long odds against them (particularly because the human infants who are raised by machines grow up severely maladjusted) some survive and eventually develop flourishing colonies. Centuries later, shortly before the sun's demise the earth civilization discovers a way to harness the zero-point energy(?) and is able to send huge ships that can travel at an appreciable fraction of the speed of light (even so, the crew and colonists are still put into suspended animation). One of these ships suffers a breakdown near a previously established colony and puts in for repairs.
IANAnE (Epidemologist) but I would think that the likelihood of creating virii that would be invulnerable to the vaccine would depend on whether there would be selection pressure to make it so. While the virii are being transmitted from human to human there is obvious selection pressure for those strains that are resistant. However I believe that most flu epidemics originate in animal (other species) hosts which serve as a long-term reservoir. It is when they cross the species barrier (typically in south-east Asia where humans and domesticated animals live in intimate proximity) that they infect humans. They become a serious threat when they gain the ability to be transmitted from human to human but (I believe) the strain is wiped out once the pandemic has run its course (and everyone who has been exposed has either been vaccinated, been infected and developed immunity or, is dead).
So it seems that this vaccine would still remain effective because there is no selection pressure against the virii in their animal hosts. Only those virii that had managed to infect humans would be selected against and since these do not re-contribute to the base genetic pool there would not be any pressure for the virii in the animal hosts to evolve an immunity to the vaccine. Of course it is possible that once the virii has managed to start spreading human to human that that strain would evolve immunity to the vaccine. But since it, like most (all?) flu strains would be wiped out at the end of the epidemic, the genetic makeup of the population would not have changed.
This presumes that overzealous farmers do not use this vaccine to cut down on the losses of their livestock. Then it IS possible (likely? inevitable?) that immunity will spread, rendering the vaccine useless. Perhaps legislation is in order to prevent the (ab)use of the vaccine in the way that anti-biotics have been heavily used by the livestock industry to boost animal size.
(I could very well be making some huge conceptual errors due to ignorance. Professional input is very much welcomed!)
Hopefully there will be a lot of (good) jokes about the ability of the average consumer to "stomach" (ha ha) these critters.
However "unappetizing" that prospect may be, why not give them to Fido or Socks? From what I've seen of dog/cat food, it is so heavily processesd, flavored and dyed that they, being unable to read the labels, may not be able to tell the difference. I don't know what other domesticated/farmed animals are fed animal protein (fish farms?) but the amount could be significant.
Just trying to take a "bite" out of the problem of global warming.
I went to a reunion at a very elite college and they had the results of a survey sent out to the alumn.
One answer to the question, "Do you think 's name helped you?" was:
"Yes, it opened many doors... and legs"
If free radicals were responsible for (a large part) of aging then blueberry farmers would routinely live to be more than 100. Blueberries supposedly have the highest amount of anti-oxidants (by weight? volume? serving size?) of any food.
Too bad, I love blueberries.
will want to be going to Mono lake and getting samples.
Is there an ecosystem? Predators, Herbivores, Carnivores, Autotrophes etc.? Is the primary energy source the sun or some chemical reaction? How do they keep the "real" biosphere from taking all of there resources (maybe just the high concentrations of arsenic).
In 10 seconds I came up with these questions, and I'm just a wannabe scientist! I'm sure every microbiologist (and geneticist, molecular biologist, systems biologist, taxonomist, etc.) would love to do some field research. If this is the only spot ON EARTH that we know of that these things exist shouldn't we be VERY CAREFUL?! (like treating an extraterrestrial probe).
Of course, that's if this rumor is true. It's beautiful/wonderful to think that it is isn't it?
The solid rocket boosters have always seemed to be the most dangerous piece of the "stack". The problem is, YOU CAN't SWITCH THEM OFF. Because of this, I believe there is literally no way out for the shuttle crew while they are firing. I think Wehrner Vom Braun refused to design man rated vehicles with a solid rocket stage (he mustn't have been responsible for the Redstone I guess). Even the Russians used liquid fueled strap-on boosters in their Buran.
Of course if the shuttle had been properly funded it would've had a liquid first stage (maybe even winged so it could fly back). But that was in an alternate universe I guess. I know that Constellation would've had an escape tower that would be (hopefully) be able to pull it away from the main vehicle but still it would be much safer if the main vehicle's engines were OFF at that point.
You must live on a different planet because I live IN VIETNAM and when I go to coffee shops (no, they're not techie coffee shops in any way) I'll usually see one or two people preening with one.
The per capita income in Vietnam is about $2K/yr., Apple computers are very rare and iPads are not even sold here yet (all the ones here are expensively imported) and probably won't be for awhile (Vietnam is way way down on Apple's list of markets).
I just can't believe that in the Hi-Tech center of the universe SAN FRANCISCO, you've only seen 2-3 "in the wild". Either you're trolling or you don't get out of your mother's basement much. Maybe both.
If it has to be incredibly time sensitive to work why not use sound (ultra-sonic waves, like bats use) instead. This should reduce the time sensitivity requirements by many orders of magnitude. It will also reduce the resolution but considering that bats can catch insects in flight probably will still be good enough to "see" someone hiding behind a door.
Or perhaps they need a coherent (laser) beam of sound? Perhaps this can be engineered around. Might also be useful underwater.
"Frankly, I would love nothing better than an OS I could put on my parents' computers and not have to worry about them calling me a month later complaining about all the pop-ups and viruses they have. "
So why haven't you done the obvious and gotten them (or told them to get) a Mac?
They don't come with bloatware/crapware/shovelware and the number of viruses/worms IN THE WILD is vanishingly small. Let's go through your other objections point by point.
Confusing distress - keep up with the Apple update schedule and there's only one distro to worry about. Even if you don't want to pay the (reasonable) update fee (for Snow Leopard it was $29), Apple supports their previous releases for a couple of years for free and it is a very rare piece of software that will require the new update.
Poor documentation - well (for your parents at least) documentation is a non-issue because the Mac OS is so easy to use that most Macs ship with a tiny pamphlet. Of course for people who want to dig deeper well Macs have the slickest easy to use documents/help system around - they ARE the world leaders in desktop publishing/graphics.
Software, Software, Software - Don't know what kind of special software your mom uses but one would think unless she's an engineer or some other sort of technologist, there will likely be a Mac version. If not, she could always use Parallels or VMware which are very large commercially supported environments to run windows software. For the rest of us, most (but not all) PC software has a native Mac equivalent like Microsoft's office suite.
Little support (if not openly hostile) - Not only will your parents find a lot of people who also own Macs to provide day to day support (like how do I download a YouTube video?) but for anything more involved there's always the formal Apple Care. Don't forget the really really nice option of making an on-line reservation at the local Apple store and then meeting with an Apple "Genius" IN PERSON who will spend AS LONG AS IS NECESSARY (my experience) to figure out what is wrong! I don't know if they are, in fact, geniuses but they do seem to be much much better trained (and have access to much better resources) than your typical big box electronics store sales guy. Also I've never been asked if my Mac was still under warranty if it did not require an actual repair!
Ways of doing things that are confusing to a Windows user - Macs ARE different and may be little confusing to the uninitiated. That said, their ease of use is legendary (do we really have to go over this) and once your parents adapt to it, they will find that the Macintosh way is much more consistent than on any other platform.
Before I retired my computer graphics company had a mixed network of Macs, Windows and SGIs and even though I had to keep them all going (and train people etc.) you can guess which ones I recommended to MY parents. The only reason why I might think you're still going the PC route is because of the alleged "Apple Tax". While some might say that is because of the superior quality of construction, even if it exists ask yourself: how much is your time worth? Even though I'm retired I still REFUSE to spend a day reformatting/installing a system because of some virus, life is too short (and getting shorter). So unless your religious convictions demand otherwise you'll find that "once you try Mac you'll never go back!". :)
* One exception that I make to this above argument is: it actually depends on which country you're living in. I'm retired in Vietnam where the per capital income is in the (very) low thousands/year. In this case the "Apple tax" superior hardware or not, is just too high a price to pay for the locals so it makes more sense for them to install their pirated copy of windows and office suite that they paid maybe 2-3 dollars for. But in any developed country I don't see why people are using windows as their "home" computer.
From the article:
"According to the team's calculations, 300 meters (984 feet) of copper wire, attached to a two-meter-wide (6.6-foot-wide) receiver and a 10-meter (32.8-foot) sail, would generate enough power for 1,000 homes.
A satellite with a 1,000-meter (3,280-foot) cable and a sail 8,400 kilometers (5,220 miles) across, placed at roughly the same orbit, would generate one billion billion gigawatts of power."
Okay according to google the average us home uses 920kWh/mo. (energy) or a little over a kilowatt (power). (Sounds about right, that's like running a single heavy appliance continuously 24 hours/day). So 1,000 homes is about a megawatt. But the article claims that by scaling up the sail by a factor of a about a trillion (from 10meters/side to about 10,000kilometers/side) increases the power recovered by a factor of a BILLION trillion (that's what a billion billion GIGAwatts is to a mere megawatt).
I think somewhere along the line somebody added an extra billion.
Even so, the claims are still a little hard to take, that implies a "sail" only a bit larger than ten kilometers on a side could power all of earth's homes. (Assume that there are 1 billion homes and that each uses the US amount; 10 sq. kilometers is a million times larger than 10 sq. meters). So why are they talking about a sail 8,400 kilometers sq.?
The numbers just don't add (multiply actually) up. I think that the first mistake/exaggeration comes from the claim that a 10 sq. meter sail could power 1000 homes. That's much more energy than could be gotten from a solar array; total solar power is around 1kW/sq. meter, so a 10 sq. meter solar cell at 100% efficiency would "only" generate 100kWs, enough for 100 homes not 1000). Anyway, these mistakes are annoying because this seems like it could be a promising technology if only, as a previous poster mentioned, to power our space based equipment. However, does it really seem likely that the big old fusion reactor in the sky (the sun) is putting out orders of magnitudes more energy in the form of the solar wind than it is through plain old radiation (sunlight)? Don't you think the nuclear physicists would have wondered where all the energy is going? Don't you think all the spacecraft flight planners would have wondered why their spacecraft were literally being blown off course by a force much stronger than solar radiation which they already take into account?
Anyway, maybe I've made an obvious mistake in my calculations, it's late in my part of the world and I need to sleep.
Back in the days when I used to design theme parks (fun profession!) I used to work with a company (Spectra F/X) that made these.
Most spectacularly GIANT versions of these flame tornados were used in Universal Studio's attraction "Backdraft" based on the movie of the same name. At least that what I think it was named; the title was about the hazard a firemen faced when entering a burning building that suddenly gets an influx of more oxygen. Anyway, the attraction is pretty impressive lots of real, hot fire and exploding oil drums (relatively) near you. If you're in Los Angeles you might want to go see it. Even though you definitely feel the heat from the flames and explosions, I think the safety record is quite good (haven't heard of any accidents).
The company designed and built this and a lot of other flame effects. I got to see one of their flame tornados being built and tested out in the cavernous workshop; i wished i had taken a closer look at this engineered device, it looked like a turbine and was roughly the size of a large trash can. (Believe me, it was engineered, this company built a lot of safety critical stuff in its day). A long time ago it won the Oscar for special effects for the movie "Ben Hur". Unfortunately it went under about 10 tears ago.
If any of the Spectra F/X guys are reading this, I'd like to say hi! (TK in CGI).
A couple of reviews of Flash running on Android 2.2 have come out. I submitted this story awhile ago to the editors but for some reason (anti-Apple bias?) they chose not to run it.
"shockingly bad" http://newteevee.com/2010/08/31/video-flash-on-android-is-startlingly-bad/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+OmMalik+(GigaOM)
"Weak Android player proves Steve Jobs right": http://blog.laptopmag.com/mobile-flash-fail-weak-android-player-proves-jobs-right
From the reviews:
"Adobe needs to have a better answer to whether or not Flash is still relevant in a world where other technologies have rapidly started displacing it. Based on my early experience with Flash Player 10.1 for mobile, it could soon join the floppy drive in the tech graveyard, something else Steve Jobs helped kill."
and
"While in theory Flash video might be a competitive advantage for Android users, in practice it’s difficult to imagine anyone actually trying to watch non-optimized web video on an Android handset, all of which makes one believe that maybe Steve Jobs was right to eschew Flash in lieu of HTML5 on the iPhone and iPad."
So is it better to have a sucky experience or none at all?
One advantage to being on, or in "orbit" around an asteroid or other small body (like the moons of mars), is that it is relatively quick and easy to change and hold one's position relative to that body. So if the astronauts see a solar flare coming they just move into the shadow and hang out there for the few hours it takes for it to pass. No expensive delta-v, no digging in the dirt.
Of course Arthur C. Clarke foresaw this in his story about a visit to the asteroid Icarus.
I have been on slashdot years and years and this is the first time I have ever mentioned any non-professional or non-technical activities or interests of mine (feel free to verify this by looking at my previous postings; but I warn you it will take a while, I've got hundreds). However when the article directly states that iPad users are lacking in "altruism or kindness" I feel I must mention my own example however anecdotal (as I recognize). It's not just the article that demands a rebuttal, another poster "1%warren" asked:
"I haven't seen any iPad users mention anything at all about altruism and kindness in their attempts to refute the 'selfish elite'" tag"
You'll see his posting a page or two below if you scroll down.
The iPad is immaterial (i actually was a C.S. Major in college, am proficient in Unix and in fact used SGIs for years. Yes I'm old, like I said I'm retired.). I'm reacting against the sheer amount of hate expressed in these posts. I've never seen anything like it (except, as I mentioned, in racial epithets). I would be equally upset if someone hated me because I drove a Mercedes (which I do not but it is sad that I have to make such a comment) or because I like the color blue or whatnot. For a "news" site like slashdot to promote such a thing is unconscionable, it is like having the Klu Klux Klan make a presentation at a NAACP meeting.
All you have to do is read the other posts to see the venom being espoused. Who benefits from giving hate a voice?
You know, cleaning the toilets at this school is not exactly what I would call pitying them.
I'm retired here, it's a lot cheaper than the states (I think you were implying that I am really rich). I didn't come here to do good works or anything but I've got a lot of free time and I figured I should do something. A Buddhist guy came around from this organization (www.tzuchi.org) and I decided to help. If I were back in the states I'd probably be doing something for the Red Cross. I've done volunteer work all my life (I had a real job so it was VOLUNTEER), have you?
By the way, while many Vietnamese are poor, there is a very unequal wealth distribution. So you'll see a lot of Merecedes and some Bentleys and MayBachs. I don't even have a car! (but I do have an iPad). Different priorities I guess.
I called the maid's kid a "dumbshit" because if I repeated what his family calls him, I'd be censored! This kid has stolen from his own family, lost money through gambling, married, quickly got his wife pregnant and now with an unborn child SHE wants a divorce. How do I know all this? Because after 3years of living here and moving from place to place they still work for me. I guess they like me.
I have a maid, guilty as charged. While I guess I could clean my own place (as I mentioned I have lots of time), I'm lazy and I'm keeping her gainfully employed. Do I pay her a lot? No, just a bit more than the going rate, but I've always kept it in the back of my mind that if there was ever a disaster I'd help her family out (not that I ever told her). Does that make me an elitist snob?
You are one obnoxious prick.
How does my argument (which anyway I said, as it feels to "me" ... "as a minority") make Apple users look like a bunch of "mindless" "toadying" "zealots"? (which are of course more choice words). Or perhaps your description of me as a "fanboi" qualifies this as an ad-hominem attack?
To be sure the consequences of being branded a fanboi are nothing in comparison to racist speech. However the same KIND of attack and thinking (or lack thereof) is what I'm pointing out (and you are reinforcing). You can probably find a study to support anything (my favorite is the one showing lower IQs in the "Red" states); what is irresponsible is a respectable(?) news site bringing up such a study for discussion. Sort of like if they brought up a study saying race X had lower IQ points than race Y.
Seems the main point is not to enlighten but to generate discord for higher ratings.
You know it feels to me, that as a minority (racial) some people at Slashdot seems enjoy inciting anti-apple people using the kinds of hate speech that other people once (and still occasionally is) used to describe us minorities. Back then there were plenty of "studies" that purported to show how various minorities were inferior in intelligence, moral character, physical attributes, etc. I guess in Slashdot's case the key phrases would be "selfish", "elite" and previously "fanbois", "Stockholm syndrome sufferers", etc.
If the only purpose of journalism is to now provoke controversy (and worse) for the sake of ad revenue, then my respect for the profession has vanished. (No, I don't consider Glenn Beck and Limbaugh journalists). While Slashdot may not aspire to "only print all the (tech) news that's fit to print", it does claim to publish "stuff that matters". I fail to see how this posting reaches even that vague standard.
And yes, this was sent from my iPad. (also, as a matter of anecdotal record, I live in Vietnam and this weekend I was at a volunteer site where they're building a school for the children of extremely poor parents. Many of the the parents (and kids!) work in brick making factories and have severe respiratory ailments from the dust. I also just gave my maid enough money to pay for the medical costs of her husband who appears to have had a stroke. Their dumbshit son lost a lot of money betting on the world cup thus wiping out their family's meager savings.)
Another thing to consider is that there IS a virtually unlimited pollution free (sort-of) power source on some of the Navy's larger vessels. It is of course the nuclear reactors on the big carriers (and maybe some of the cruisers?). I can't imagine that the power source capable of pushing a close to 100,000 ton ship through the ocean at 40 knots is going to have trouble powering a few measly lasers (either Kw or Mw). Even if it causes the ship to slow down a bit, that would hardly seem to make a difference to a missile coming in at Mach 5.
I believe that this is one of the justifications the Navy has used to making more "electric" ships where even in smaller vessels the propeller is not driven directly by the engine. Instead there is a gas turbine that runs a generator which then powers electric motors. In addition to thus being able to use the propulsive power to run electrically powered weapons (not just lasers, think rail guns), the power is also storable in batteries allowing for surges and the ability to run more quietly. There is even the possibility of more exotic propulsion systems being used (magnetohydrodynamics? the "crawler" in the movie "The Hunt for Red October"). Another benefit is that this power train, like a hybrid car, is more energy efficient (although it might be more picky about fuel). There are other applications made possible if boats are electrically powered (such as being possible electric generators for temporary onshore encampments much as like you can use a hybrid to light your house during a black-out) but you get the picture.
So, if in fact, the Navy will be using electrically powered lasers (free-electron?) the infrastructure should already be in place. In fact, one other intriguing possibly is the placement of such weapons on the (nuclear powered) fast attack submarines defending each carrier group. Not only could they provide another "picket line" defense that the enemy could not observe; they might be able to fire their lasers while remaining largely submerged by using the optics already present in the periscope. Finally, if these are free-electron lasers and thus tunable to blue-green wavelengths; they could conceivably be used as u
nderwater defensive weapons eithe-r by directly detonating $@incoming torpedos (or even Russia's rumored underwater supercavitating "rockets") or -(,by "jamming" the hom
ing sonar by $@/disrupting the acoustic environment through cavitation (boiling) and other effects. Of course if any of these more spec:@"'vulative ideas had an
y credence to them, it is highly unli!?.kely that this information would be allowe:);d to be posted on the Inter...
"...we need to do a better job taking care of our early iPhone customers as we aggressively go after new ones with a lower price. Our early customers trusted us, and we must live up to that trust with our actions in moments like these.
Therefore, we have decided to offer every iPhone customer who purchased an iPhone from either Apple or AT&T, and who is not receiving a rebate or any other consideration, a $100 store credit towards the purchase of any product at an Apple Retail Store or the Apple Online Store. Details are still being worked out and will be posted on Apple's website next week. Stay tuned."
and
"We apologize for disappointing some of you, and we are doing our best to live up to your high expectations of Apple," Jobs wrote.
First off, thanks for at least acknowledging the possibility that you might be wrong and that Apple may, in fact, try to address this issue. Too many fanbois have ruined this part of Slasdot by spewing vitriol and what can only be described as hate. No light, just heat.
I think that Apple will address the issue because this special conference is being called on extremely short notice (with MacNN calling it an "emergency press conference"). Having not seen the actual wording, I can't say for certain but again due to the short time-scale (less than 48 hours) it wouldn't seem to be just another announcement of a product update.
Also you are incorrect in asserting that Apple doesn't "admit mistakes". The most recent example that I can recall is the $200 rebates they gave everyone who bought an original iPhone. As you recall, that occurred after the angry groundswell from early adopters who had purchased it a few months before for a couple hundred dollars more. I do not remember whether they gave hints that they might do this or if they called a "special press conference" on short notice.
On the other hand, the market seems to think you're right! Last I checked Apple was down 1.5 percent, roughly double the overall market. So people seem to think Apple will have no or an innefectual response.
Guess if I really believe this conference will solve things I should buy Apple stock! :). And you should sell short!