Griffin may be, as you say, 100% correct here but telling contractors and others to "support Constellation and not discuss alternatives" as well as demanding "mid-level executives from not meeting with the transition team" is INTOLERABLE (from TFA). Considering this comes from an accredited journalist from a reputable news organization (at least I've heard of them previously), their claims of having witnesses, documents and e-mails to back them up should be taken seriously.
Perhaps Griffin is one of the few Bush appointees who isn't corrupt, incompetent or so politically/religiously biased as to commit criminal acts (justice department I'm looking at you). On the other hand considering the absolute disasters this administration has led us into regarding war, international relations, energy policies, the economy, the environment, civil/human rights, politicization of science, corruption of the judiciary, (oh and did I remember the war on terror?) I think anyone with half a brain would look upon anyone Bush would pick with extreme skepticism.
The shuttle HAS been a disaster for the last 25 years. If his plan has decent merit hopefully it will be allowed to continue. Hopefully Obama's team will consider not just the plan itself but the costs of any delay/change to a new one and will make the best choice accordingly. Of course there is a risk that they may not but we did not elect the president of NASA, we elected the PRESIDENT OF THE USA to make these decisions for us. Even as an avid space buff I have to respect that there ARE things more important than NASA. Considering Obama's top level appointments so far I have confidence that they'll do a good job.
If Griffin's plan is good, he will always be known as the one who got the ball rolling and pushed it through difficult and uncertain times. (Maybe he feels so entitled at NASA because under Bush everyone around him WAS an idiot). IF THE ALLEGATIONS from the newspaper ARE TRUE though, he, with his resorting to tactics reminiscent of his other Bushies, has proven that he does not have the character to lead NASA. Let Ares go without him.
So I took a few seconds to RTFA and I found (or didn't find):
It uses SOLAR PANELS to power this thing all the way to Jupiter. That'll beat the previous record holder (I think the DAWN mission to Vesta and Ceres) for use of solar power away from the sun. TFA says that other than a 10 min period in earth's shadow during a flyby it will always be in sunlight.
1) So does that mean it will be in a sun synchronous polar orbit at Jupiter? Won't that compromise the data collection opportunities it has? (It'll never be able to look "straight down" with the sun at its back).
I couldn't find any details about how it intends to enter and then adjust its jupiter-centric polar orbit. I see no mention of using gravity assist WITHIN the jupiter system using any of the galilean satellites to reduce the amount of delta V for insertion (and adjustments). Is this because they are going into a polar orbit and won't be in the plane of the satellite's orbits? Nor did I see any mention of some fancy aero-braking (like the Mars orbiters use). (Of course I guess ion drives (like those used in DAWN) wouldn't be practical because the probe would have to "linger" too long in Jupiter's radiation belts while it slowly shed velocity).
2) So will they be using some standard chemical propellents with a long storage time (like Cassini)? Will a large part of the spacecraft be fuel or does its "unique highly elliptical" orbit not require too much delta V to enter?
Anyway, sounds like a cool mission, that won't cost too much or take too long to get there (uses solar power so no expensive nukes, uses 1 gravity assist and a medium size Atlas booster). Hopefully the camera has a high enough resolution to take a picture of Medusa! (Please see Arthur C. Clarke's "Meeting with Medusa").
Now I know why an "Ender's" film will never be
on
Ender in Exile
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
no one in Hollywood would risk offending the "gay" mafia nor would they dare go up against the inevitable boycotts and protests.
And I agree!
Would you buy a painting, no matter how great, from Hitler? (He was an artist when he was quite young I understand). Knowing his views, I certainly wouldn't and I'm neither gay nor Jewish!
This isn't a case of being P.C., it is a case of just being C.
In biologist Peter Ward's book "LIFE AS WE DO NOT KNOW IT" he holds out the possibility that there might be THREE radically different kinds of life on Titan.
One might be related to, or if we're not careful with contamination, might be the same as our DNA based "CHON" (Carbon, Hydrogen, Oxygen and Nitrogen) life. They would presumably live on the surface feeding on the hydrocarbons drifting down from the sky; similar to our methanogens or other chemo-trophic bacteria on earth.
Another kind of life might be something a "little" different (but still really unlike anything seen on earth, life that uses AMMONIUM as its working fluid as opposed to our life which uses water. (It would presumably live in the ammonium ocean speculated to beneath the ice) that forms Titan's surface. It's only a "little" different because it would still be basically be CHON life but who knows what its metabolism would run on?
Finally he even mentions the possibility of a SILICON based life (as opposed to our carbon based life). No, unlike the star trek Horta from "Devil in the Dark', it needn't live deep underground. Instead it would life in some of the ethane-methane lakes at the surface (which would be capable of making the silicon soluble and would substitue in for carbon I guess). So all of life's components; fats, sugars, proteins, RNA and DNA would use silicon as a major structural component. Now that's different!
For these admittedly extremely speculative reasons he suggests Titan should be just as high on our priority list of places to visit as Mars. Instead of sending a geologist-paleontologist (as he would to mars) he recommends sending a biochemist to Titan. Anyway if they found even ONE of the three kinds of life there, it would (even if they were just micro-organisms) be an incredible discovery. Of course because of Titan's distance it'll be a long while before we can put a human there, maybe we'll have to wait for A.I.
1) So does it use the same sort of heat resistant but very fragile tiles that the space shuttle uses? Is that why it has a shroud covering it during launch (adding weight and complexity)?
2) Will this be able to work at very high re-entry speeds not just from earth orbit but from lunar/mars return missions? The video (at the very end) seems to imply this. (Couldn't tell from the wind tunnel footage; shows only shock waves at Mach 1.4. And no CFD simulations!).
3) Does this thing really need a FOUR stage rocket to get it into space (and it is not even shown completing one orbit!). Has Europe never been interested in SSTO (single stage to orbit) concepts?
4) As another poster mentioned, it looks reminiscent of a lifting body. Does it actually generate lift or is the shape purely for control?
Don't know, (I'm not in one of the underperforming minorities). However hopefully this will help put an end to the bigotry of low expectations (from others and themselves).
This election is unlike any other because: - it ends the disastrous legacy of eight years of Bush - it shows the triumph of Hope and Looking Forwards (how Obama campaigned) over of Fear and Divisiveness (how McCain/Palin campaigned.
But most importantly: - it shows just how far America's gone towards MLK's "Dream". ANYONE can become president. Think about it; how many people, in THEIR OWN COUNTRIES can imagine themselves (or more importantly, their children) becoming the leader if they are not from the right clan/tribe/race/ethincity/social class. (Obama, the product of a Kenyan muslim father, lived in Indonesia, grew up in Hawaii and, as raised by his single mother, was most definitely out of the American Power structure).
THAT IS WHAT HAS/WILL MAKE AMERICA GREAT - THE FREEDOM TO ACHIEVE WHATEVER YOU ARE CAPABLE. NO MATTER WHO YOU ARE. No other country comes close I think, think about all the barriers that would prevent most people, short of revolution, from assuming the presidency in their country.
As a minority from America this, more than anything else, makes me feel like America is truly my home. Honestly it would be easier to be a success in America with all of its "racism" than in my ancestral homeland.
(It is just like how, in the movie "Ratatouille" that we realize that the phrase "Anyone Can Cook" means not that anyone can be a master chef but that a master chef can come from anywhere, even from the most unlikely of backgrounds.;)
Oops, my bad.;) (But I did say "other" as in other future landings). So my question still stands, I assume there are no policies regarding future visitations? Are there any legal precedents like shipwrecks? (Removing artifacts from the Titanic, for example, I assume is legally "okay" because it is a shipwreck no? The Apollo landing site has not been "abandoned" I presume).
I have no idea about this arcane part of international law.
Hmm... I'm just a little concerned about other (commercial) parties landing at Tranquility Base (the name for the Apollo 11 landing site) and desecrating (is that too strong a word?) it. I mean, if the Chinese got there and defaced the lander and removed the footprints there would be a lot of very angry Americans.
I assume that self-interest will keep any visitors from doing anything to egregious but are there any policies for keeping these sites pristine? Maybe someday they'll be preserved in a bubble just like on Futurama!
So what are the alternatives? I understand that not only is the shuttle getting very old (and presumably less safe with already a 1:100 chance of failure per launch) but is extremely expensive in terms of dollars/lb. to orbit.
Are there any reasonable alternatives that are available in say, 5 years? Such as using a man-rated Delta (very reliable commercial launcher) for the relatively small Orion crew capsule and perhaps some sort of Shuttle tank + Shuttle engines + 2 current boosters as a heavy lift vehicle? Or will the U.S. be without manned space flight capabilities in a few years (ceding it to the Russians and Chinese!).
Any NASA/ex-NASA/space experts out there? (By the way, really disappointed that the SSTO efforts like the Delta Clipper and X-34(?) didn't work out. Also, no, the Japanese space elevator will not be available for at least 20 years and probably not within our lifetimes).
Yes, I know that implies I read TFA. But it was pretty good, I thought it concisely explained that they'll be using transits to look for these exo-planets then hopefully use the Webb space telescope to get an idea of the planet's atmosphere by looking at the spectrum in the infra-red. (That's where Webb is designed to be most sensitive and that's where the star "only" outshines any orbiting earth-like planet by say 10,000:1).
My question is: So does that mean that transit detection has won out over looking for the doppler effect? I thought that there was some advance in making super stable laser "frequency combs" that allowed tiny amounts of stellar radial velocities (like centimeters/sec) to be detected not just the meters/sec that they can do now. This would allow earth-mass objects in earth-like orbits to be detected through stellar "wobbles".
It seems that the doppler detection method would have at least one major advantage, since you don't have to "stare" at the star for months/years on end the telescope doesn't have to be in (deep) space. That implies a really BIG telescope on earth could be used and could visit many targets per night. (On the other hand, having Kepler look at hundreds of thousands of targets simultaneously is pretty darn efficient, Also,observation of transits is not distance dependent). Anyway, maybe it'll be a good way to confirm detection; nothing better than two separate observations using completely different methods, instruments and technology.
You know of course that IF they find a whole bunch of earthlike planets with oxygenated atmospheres they'll be a real desire to try to get better images. Maybe this would be a good use for a REALLY BIG liquid mirror telescope on the far side of the moon! I'm wondering where would it have to be placed in order to cover the same region of the sky as Kepler? I'm wondering if such a telescope could detect any indications of a technological civilization, like fluorocarbons or radionucleotides. How about really big structures (like the great wall of china;). Also I'm sure that S.E.T.I. will follow up on the list of "earthlike planets" with a targeted radio astronomy listening program. I'm wondering if a dish like Arecibo could detect regular broadcasts or radar that weren't specifically aimed at us over the distances these surveys will be taking place (10K parsecs?). Anyway, exciting things!
Are the lasers that they are using in the microwave range? Shouldn't they be called Masers (I believe that's the correct term)? Then why the reference to "optical" networking gear? Really just curious.
By the way (if anyone bothers reading this) I heard that the use of microwaves as a cooking method was discovered when technicians who climbed microwave towers reported hearing "popping" sounds while they worked. No microphones could pick it up and it was eventually determined that the rapid expansion and contraction of the water in their skulls due to the microwaves was being "heard" by their eardrums. Anybody know if this is fact or fiction?
The cynic in me is beginning to believe that Winston Churchill was wrong in saying that "Democracy was the least worst form of government". After being a part of the American political process for the last 8 years I've seen how ideology has, time and again, trumped reason. Still I'm not completely impressed with other systems, the "meritocratic" technocratic bureaucracy espoused by the Chinese communist party seems flawed as well (don't buy Chinese Milk!). That's despite being described as "the Harvard Alumni Association with an Army".
Maybe the fact is that, as humans (and 98% chimp) we're only slightly beyond our animal forebears. Perhaps we just cannot handle a technologic civilization with complex issues like genetic engineering, nuclear weapons, climate change, nano technology. If Fukuyama is right in saying that Liberal Democracies are "the end of history" maybe it means that that's the end of our progress. - Then again maybe the United States (with its 70% of the population being strongly religious) is an aberration and the future lies with other less religious societies.
First I didn't quite understand the wording of your post, it almost made it seem that Raygun was talking TODAY (whereas I'm sure you know he's gone to the great laser shield in the sky for over a decade).
Anyway, we are still FAR FAR from an SDI. Although it MIGHT be capable of taking out a few primitive N. Korean warheads with few or no decoys, there is NO CHANCE that it could do so against a major power bent on raining hellish death on the U.S. A complete SDI system is what Reagan wanted; a comprehensive STRATEGIC (not tactical) defense system that could rid the world (actually just us) of nuclear terror.
When you consider that the major powers can easily launch many decoys, explode nukes in space (EMP), blind satellites with lasers, use maneuverable re-entry vehicles, attack (prior to the main assault) early warning, tracking and defensive systems as well as BRUTE FORCE OVERWHELMING the system with THOUSANDS OF WARHEADS, any rational person (Raygun?) will know it is infeasible now and for probably a few more decades. Why? Because Nuclear Weapons are so CHEAP (relative to the damage they create) and it is sooo hard to hit "a bullet with a bullet".
Of course that's the reasoning that the U.S. is trying to sell the Russians on regarding our ABM system in eastern europe, that the Russians could swat it aside like a bug.
Scientists don't sit around and take votes to decide what is true or is not; NATURE decides. Rather a scientist will run an experiment to see if it supports his pet theory. If it does and if it is REPEATABLE by others, then depending on how well his theory is supported and how strongly the results refute other theories HIS THEORY BECOMES ACCEPTED.
Of course, scientists being human, this may take a while because of misunderstandings, ego, professional jealousy, investedness in another theory but eventually the theory with better supporting evidence wins out. IT MAY TAKE AWHILE, sometimes as long as waiting until the old stubborn scientists to DIE OUT and be replaced by younger ones who come in "unbiased". See Thomas Kuhn "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions". Not perfect but the best method we've got for discerning OBJECTIVE TRUTH.
Sorry to diverge from the screenshot topic but does anyone know if Mr. Zdziarski will demonstrating how to hack the just released 2.1 firmware? Or is a previous version that (may have) been patched? This seems much more significant than being able to see (via a screenshot) what the last user action was.
As for the screenshot, hmm... well at least it doesn't seem to be a deliberate attempt by Apple to get more info on the user. Also, it seems pretty difficult to get these screenshots (since they are automatically deleted according to the article you have to find and undelete them). Doesn't sound like a trivial or reliable way to snoop on people. Still I guess a security flaw is a flaw so be aware!
Ah, the French are a rapidly dwindling influence in Vietnam (I sure hope none are reading this!;) When a local business school started teaching its classes in English, admissions immediately QUADRUPLED (and that was a few years ago). Now I only hear french at french restaurants by patrons and old vietnamese waiters. (But the food is great! Especially the french bread! And French Fries!)
Still Vietnamese WRITING was made by some french scholar/priest who based it mostly on western characters. So you CAN get most of the meaning of something across by using a non-vietnamese keyboard. What's really interesting about the auto spelling built into the iPhone is that IT LEARNS. After I keep typing certain Vietnamese words (without the special characters of course) the iPhone will use that as the standard spelling!
I went back and looked at the article closely and noticed some things.
1) They seem to be measuring OVERALL sales of touchscreens in the entire world. (It appears they asked the manufacturers how many touchscreens they were selling).
2) However they are basing Apple's "thrashing" on the fact that 80% of the leaders' (Moto and Samsung) touchscreen sales come from Asia.
3) Apple has only been selling in ONE country in Asia (Japan) for any length of time. India and Singapore have recently (one or two months ago?) been added.
4) So they're comparing ALL of Motorola's and Samsung's sales across Asia against Apple's sales in at ONE country for more than a few months. That leaves out CHINA, Korea, Taiwan, Thailand, Indonesia, Malaysia, Hong Kong (SAR), Philippines, etc.
It seems like this is the sort of "article" that was thrown together by looking at one statistic (worldwide sales of a product) and distribution of the sales of the product without understanding the companies involved (the writer obviously didn't know that Apple hasn't entered Asia except for Japan until recently. So how can you compare sales and then draw conclusions?).
Other questions like "What is a touchscreen device? Does it include devices that use stylii?" remain unanswered. Also, this whole category of touchscreen devices may be quite recent as the other cell-phone manufacturers are reacting to the iPhone. (Prior to the iPhone I do not recall touchscreens being used except for Palm devices). So it is quite possible that Apple has a large share of the market WHERE IT IS COMPETING.
You ever see the comic strip with Dilbert competing with Zazu the monkey? Dilbert thinks he's got him licked as they sit side by side at their computers furiously working away (to impress the PHB). Then Dilbert notices that Zazu is going faster than he is! He realizes he's got an unfair advantage; Zazu can use his TAIL to operate the mouse and keep both "hands" (do monkeys have hands?) on the keyboard.
"I felt the jaws of evolution close around me" - Dilbert
Sure, spec's are quite important but when you consider how much of the power of the modern PC is DEDICATED to the user interface you'll see how much Apple (and Microsoft!) value it. Think about using a word processor on the first PC maybe 30 years ago. You could type out a nice letter (okay one font) and the computer was plenty responsive. Now we have machines with literally a MILLION times the speed and memory and a HUNDRED MILLION times the disk storage. Where as (almost) all of this new power gone? For the user interface.
Don't get me wrong, spec's essential when price/performance is important. After theme parks, I now do digital film compression; I take 100,000+ frames of film (or about 5 TB of data) and mash it down to be distributed to movie theaters. Believe me, it takes a lot of horsepower to do so and I'm very familiar with bare bones user interfaces. But when I don't have to use these command line interfaces where one little mistake can cause serious damage, I'd rather user a nice GUI. And that's why I like my Mac (and iPhone).
Still your point is well taken. Would I still use an iPhone if it had significantly less features than my old Palm Treo? I doubt it.
Don't think so, like I said, the iPhone is quite a status symbol here so when I see it they're usually showing me things like their pictures on it, web-browsing etc. If it is that good of a fake I'll buy it! (I know that Mizu in China has a chinese fake out but all the menus are in chinese and the user interface is a bit different.)
You may be right but TFA doesn't say if the figures are only for the ONE market Apple's been in for any time (Japan). Wouldn't they have said "Moto and Samsung have 80% of... Japan"? Also, the claim is not for the ENTIRE market but just for the touchscreen market, isn't the touchscreen market pretty small considering that it has only been since the iPhone came out that the other manufacturers have released serious touchscreen devices? What is the definition of a touchscreen phone? Do they include phones with stylii?
Still, I don't know, maybe they ARE only referring to the Japanese (and the newly entered Indian and Singaporean) markets. Oops! Time to sell Apple Stock!;)
Slashdot Mirror
Griffin may be, as you say, 100% correct here but telling contractors and others to "support Constellation and not discuss alternatives" as well as demanding "mid-level executives from not meeting with the transition team" is INTOLERABLE (from TFA). Considering this comes from an accredited journalist from a reputable news organization (at least I've heard of them previously), their claims of having witnesses, documents and e-mails to back them up should be taken seriously.
Perhaps Griffin is one of the few Bush appointees who isn't corrupt, incompetent or so politically/religiously biased as to commit criminal acts (justice department I'm looking at you). On the other hand considering the absolute disasters this administration has led us into regarding war, international relations, energy policies, the economy, the environment, civil/human rights, politicization of science, corruption of the judiciary, (oh and did I remember the war on terror?) I think anyone with half a brain would look upon anyone Bush would pick with extreme skepticism.
The shuttle HAS been a disaster for the last 25 years. If his plan has decent merit hopefully it will be allowed to continue. Hopefully Obama's team will consider not just the plan itself but the costs of any delay/change to a new one and will make the best choice accordingly. Of course there is a risk that they may not but we did not elect the president of NASA, we elected the PRESIDENT OF THE USA to make these decisions for us. Even as an avid space buff I have to respect that there ARE things more important than NASA. Considering Obama's top level appointments so far I have confidence that they'll do a good job.
If Griffin's plan is good, he will always be known as the one who got the ball rolling and pushed it through difficult and uncertain times. (Maybe he feels so entitled at NASA because under Bush everyone around him WAS an idiot). IF THE ALLEGATIONS from the newspaper ARE TRUE though, he, with his resorting to tactics reminiscent of his other Bushies, has proven that he does not have the character to lead NASA. Let Ares go without him.
So I took a few seconds to RTFA and I found (or didn't find):
It uses SOLAR PANELS to power this thing all the way to Jupiter. That'll beat the previous record holder (I think the DAWN mission to Vesta and Ceres) for use of solar power away from the sun. TFA says that other than a 10 min period in earth's shadow during a flyby it will always be in sunlight.
1) So does that mean it will be in a sun synchronous polar orbit at Jupiter? Won't that compromise the data collection opportunities it has? (It'll never be able to look "straight down" with the sun at its back).
I couldn't find any details about how it intends to enter and then adjust its jupiter-centric polar orbit. I see no mention of using gravity assist WITHIN the jupiter system using any of the galilean satellites to reduce the amount of delta V for insertion (and adjustments). Is this because they are going into a polar orbit and won't be in the plane of the satellite's orbits? Nor did I see any mention of some fancy aero-braking (like the Mars orbiters use). (Of course I guess ion drives (like those used in DAWN) wouldn't be practical because the probe would have to "linger" too long in Jupiter's radiation belts while it slowly shed velocity).
2) So will they be using some standard chemical propellents with a long storage time (like Cassini)? Will a large part of the spacecraft be fuel or does its "unique highly elliptical" orbit not require too much delta V to enter?
Anyway, sounds like a cool mission, that won't cost too much or take too long to get there (uses solar power so no expensive nukes, uses 1 gravity assist and a medium size Atlas booster). Hopefully the camera has a high enough resolution to take a picture of Medusa! (Please see Arthur C. Clarke's "Meeting with Medusa").
no one in Hollywood would risk offending the "gay" mafia nor would they dare go up against the inevitable boycotts and protests.
And I agree!
Would you buy a painting, no matter how great, from Hitler? (He was an artist when he was quite young I understand). Knowing his views, I certainly wouldn't and I'm neither gay nor Jewish!
This isn't a case of being P.C., it is a case of just being C.
In biologist Peter Ward's book "LIFE AS WE DO NOT KNOW IT" he holds out the possibility that there might be THREE radically different kinds of life on Titan.
One might be related to, or if we're not careful with contamination, might be the same as our DNA based "CHON" (Carbon, Hydrogen, Oxygen and Nitrogen) life. They would presumably live on the surface feeding on the hydrocarbons drifting down from the sky; similar to our methanogens or other chemo-trophic bacteria on earth.
Another kind of life might be something a "little" different (but still really unlike anything seen on earth, life that uses AMMONIUM as its working fluid as opposed to our life which uses water. (It would presumably live in the ammonium ocean speculated to beneath the ice) that forms Titan's surface. It's only a "little" different because it would still be basically be CHON life but who knows what its metabolism would run on?
Finally he even mentions the possibility of a SILICON based life (as opposed to our carbon based life). No, unlike the star trek Horta from "Devil in the Dark', it needn't live deep underground. Instead it would life in some of the ethane-methane lakes at the surface (which would be capable of making the silicon soluble and would substitue in for carbon I guess). So all of life's components; fats, sugars, proteins, RNA and DNA would use silicon as a major structural component. Now that's different!
For these admittedly extremely speculative reasons he suggests Titan should be just as high on our priority list of places to visit as Mars. Instead of sending a geologist-paleontologist (as he would to mars) he recommends sending a biochemist to Titan. Anyway if they found even ONE of the three kinds of life there, it would (even if they were just micro-organisms) be an incredible discovery. Of course because of Titan's distance it'll be a long while before we can put a human there, maybe we'll have to wait for A.I.
1) So does it use the same sort of heat resistant but very fragile tiles that the space shuttle uses? Is that why it has a shroud covering it during launch (adding weight and complexity)?
2) Will this be able to work at very high re-entry speeds not just from earth orbit but from lunar/mars return missions? The video (at the very end) seems to imply this. (Couldn't tell from the wind tunnel footage; shows only shock waves at Mach 1.4. And no CFD simulations!).
3) Does this thing really need a FOUR stage rocket to get it into space (and it is not even shown completing one orbit!). Has Europe never been interested in SSTO (single stage to orbit) concepts?
4) As another poster mentioned, it looks reminiscent of a lifting body. Does it actually generate lift or is the shape purely for control?
Don't know, (I'm not in one of the underperforming minorities). However hopefully this will help put an end to the bigotry of low expectations (from others and themselves).
This election is unlike any other because:
- it ends the disastrous legacy of eight years of Bush
- it shows the triumph of Hope and Looking Forwards (how Obama campaigned) over of Fear and Divisiveness (how McCain/Palin campaigned.
But most importantly:
- it shows just how far America's gone towards MLK's "Dream". ANYONE can become president. Think about it; how many people, in THEIR OWN COUNTRIES can imagine themselves (or more importantly, their children) becoming the leader if they are not from the right clan/tribe/race/ethincity/social class. (Obama, the product of a Kenyan muslim father, lived in Indonesia, grew up in Hawaii and, as raised by his single mother, was most definitely out of the American Power structure).
THAT IS WHAT HAS/WILL MAKE AMERICA GREAT - THE FREEDOM TO ACHIEVE WHATEVER YOU ARE CAPABLE. NO MATTER WHO YOU ARE. No other country comes close I think, think about all the barriers that would prevent most people, short of revolution, from assuming the presidency in their country.
As a minority from America this, more than anything else, makes me feel like America is truly my home. Honestly it would be easier to be a success in America with all of its "racism" than in my ancestral homeland.
(It is just like how, in the movie "Ratatouille" that we realize that the phrase "Anyone Can Cook" means not that anyone can be a master chef but that a master chef can come from anywhere, even from the most unlikely of backgrounds. ;)
Oops, my bad. ;) (But I did say "other" as in other future landings). So my question still stands, I assume there are no policies regarding future visitations? Are there any legal precedents like shipwrecks? (Removing artifacts from the Titanic, for example, I assume is legally "okay" because it is a shipwreck no? The Apollo landing site has not been "abandoned" I presume).
I have no idea about this arcane part of international law.
Hmm... I'm just a little concerned about other (commercial) parties landing at Tranquility Base (the name for the Apollo 11 landing site) and desecrating (is that too strong a word?) it. I mean, if the Chinese got there and defaced the lander and removed the footprints there would be a lot of very angry Americans.
I assume that self-interest will keep any visitors from doing anything to egregious but are there any policies for keeping these sites pristine? Maybe someday they'll be preserved in a bubble just like on Futurama!
Please, this is not a troll.
So what are the alternatives? I understand that not only is the shuttle getting very old (and presumably less safe with already a 1:100 chance of failure per launch) but is extremely expensive in terms of dollars/lb. to orbit.
Are there any reasonable alternatives that are available in say, 5 years? Such as using a man-rated Delta (very reliable commercial launcher) for the relatively small Orion crew capsule and perhaps some sort of Shuttle tank + Shuttle engines + 2 current boosters as a heavy lift vehicle? Or will the U.S. be without manned space flight capabilities in a few years (ceding it to the Russians and Chinese!).
Any NASA/ex-NASA/space experts out there? (By the way, really disappointed that the SSTO efforts like the Delta Clipper and X-34(?) didn't work out. Also, no, the Japanese space elevator will not be available for at least 20 years and probably not within our lifetimes).
Yes, I know that implies I read TFA. But it was pretty good, I thought it concisely explained that they'll be using transits to look for these exo-planets then hopefully use the Webb space telescope to get an idea of the planet's atmosphere by looking at the spectrum in the infra-red. (That's where Webb is designed to be most sensitive and that's where the star "only" outshines any orbiting earth-like planet by say 10,000:1).
My question is: So does that mean that transit detection has won out over looking for the doppler effect? I thought that there was some advance in making super stable laser "frequency combs" that allowed tiny amounts of stellar radial velocities (like centimeters/sec) to be detected not just the meters/sec that they can do now. This would allow earth-mass objects in earth-like orbits to be detected through stellar "wobbles".
It seems that the doppler detection method would have at least one major advantage, since you don't have to "stare" at the star for months/years on end the telescope doesn't have to be in (deep) space. That implies a really BIG telescope on earth could be used and could visit many targets per night. (On the other hand, having Kepler look at hundreds of thousands of targets simultaneously is pretty darn efficient, Also,observation of transits is not distance dependent). Anyway, maybe it'll be a good way to confirm detection; nothing better than two separate observations using completely different methods, instruments and technology.
You know of course that IF they find a whole bunch of earthlike planets with oxygenated atmospheres they'll be a real desire to try to get better images. Maybe this would be a good use for a REALLY BIG liquid mirror telescope on the far side of the moon! I'm wondering where would it have to be placed in order to cover the same region of the sky as Kepler? I'm wondering if such a telescope could detect any indications of a technological civilization, like fluorocarbons or radionucleotides. How about really big structures (like the great wall of china ;). Also I'm sure that S.E.T.I. will follow up on the list of "earthlike planets" with a targeted radio astronomy listening program. I'm wondering if a dish like Arecibo could detect regular broadcasts or radar that weren't specifically aimed at us over the distances these surveys will be taking place (10K parsecs?). Anyway, exciting things!
Are the lasers that they are using in the microwave range? Shouldn't they be called Masers (I believe that's the correct term)? Then why the reference to "optical" networking gear? Really just curious.
By the way (if anyone bothers reading this) I heard that the use of microwaves as a cooking method was discovered when technicians who climbed microwave towers reported hearing "popping" sounds while they worked. No microphones could pick it up and it was eventually determined that the rapid expansion and contraction of the water in their skulls due to the microwaves was being "heard" by their eardrums. Anybody know if this is fact or fiction?
The cynic in me is beginning to believe that Winston Churchill was wrong in saying that "Democracy was the least worst form of government". After being a part of the American political process for the last 8 years I've seen how ideology has, time and again, trumped reason. Still I'm not completely impressed with other systems, the "meritocratic" technocratic bureaucracy espoused by the Chinese communist party seems flawed as well (don't buy Chinese Milk!). That's despite being described as "the Harvard Alumni Association with an Army".
Maybe the fact is that, as humans (and 98% chimp) we're only slightly beyond our animal forebears. Perhaps we just cannot handle a technologic civilization with complex issues like genetic engineering, nuclear weapons, climate change, nano technology. If Fukuyama is right in saying that Liberal Democracies are "the end of history" maybe it means that that's the end of our progress. - Then again maybe the United States (with its 70% of the population being strongly religious) is an aberration and the future lies with other less religious societies.
First I didn't quite understand the wording of your post, it almost made it seem that Raygun was talking TODAY (whereas I'm sure you know he's gone to the great laser shield in the sky for over a decade).
Anyway, we are still FAR FAR from an SDI. Although it MIGHT be capable of taking out a few primitive N. Korean warheads with few or no decoys, there is NO CHANCE that it could do so against a major power bent on raining hellish death on the U.S. A complete SDI system is what Reagan wanted; a comprehensive STRATEGIC (not tactical) defense system that could rid the world (actually just us) of nuclear terror.
When you consider that the major powers can easily launch many decoys, explode nukes in space (EMP), blind satellites with lasers, use maneuverable re-entry vehicles, attack (prior to the main assault) early warning, tracking and defensive systems as well as BRUTE FORCE OVERWHELMING the system with THOUSANDS OF WARHEADS, any rational person (Raygun?) will know it is infeasible now and for probably a few more decades. Why? Because Nuclear Weapons are so CHEAP (relative to the damage they create) and it is sooo hard to hit "a bullet with a bullet".
Of course that's the reasoning that the U.S. is trying to sell the Russians on regarding our ABM system in eastern europe, that the Russians could swat it aside like a bug.
Scientists don't sit around and take votes to decide what is true or is not; NATURE decides. Rather a scientist will run an experiment to see if it supports his pet theory. If it does and if it is REPEATABLE by others, then depending on how well his theory is supported and how strongly the results refute other theories HIS THEORY BECOMES ACCEPTED.
Of course, scientists being human, this may take a while because of misunderstandings, ego, professional jealousy, investedness in another theory but eventually the theory with better supporting evidence wins out. IT MAY TAKE AWHILE, sometimes as long as waiting until the old stubborn scientists to DIE OUT and be replaced by younger ones who come in "unbiased". See Thomas Kuhn "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions". Not perfect but the best method we've got for discerning OBJECTIVE TRUTH.
Sorry to diverge from the screenshot topic but does anyone know if Mr. Zdziarski will demonstrating how to hack the just released 2.1 firmware? Or is a previous version that (may have) been patched? This seems much more significant than being able to see (via a screenshot) what the last user action was.
As for the screenshot, hmm... well at least it doesn't seem to be a deliberate attempt by Apple to get more info on the user. Also, it seems pretty difficult to get these screenshots (since they are automatically deleted according to the article you have to find and undelete them). Doesn't sound like a trivial or reliable way to snoop on people. Still I guess a security flaw is a flaw so be aware!
Yeah I don't know either
Ah, the French are a rapidly dwindling influence in Vietnam (I sure hope none are reading this! ;) When a local business school started teaching its classes in English, admissions immediately QUADRUPLED (and that was a few years ago). Now I only hear french at french restaurants by patrons and old vietnamese waiters. (But the food is great! Especially the french bread! And French Fries!)
Still Vietnamese WRITING was made by some french scholar/priest who based it mostly on western characters. So you CAN get most of the meaning of something across by using a non-vietnamese keyboard. What's really interesting about the auto spelling built into the iPhone is that IT LEARNS. After I keep typing certain Vietnamese words (without the special characters of course) the iPhone will use that as the standard spelling!
I went back and looked at the article closely and noticed some things.
1) They seem to be measuring OVERALL sales of touchscreens in the entire world. (It appears they asked the manufacturers how many touchscreens they were selling).
2) However they are basing Apple's "thrashing" on the fact that 80% of the leaders' (Moto and Samsung) touchscreen sales come from Asia.
3) Apple has only been selling in ONE country in Asia (Japan) for any length of time. India and Singapore have recently (one or two months ago?) been added.
4) So they're comparing ALL of Motorola's and Samsung's sales across Asia against Apple's sales in at ONE country for more than a few months. That leaves out CHINA, Korea, Taiwan, Thailand, Indonesia, Malaysia, Hong Kong (SAR), Philippines, etc.
It seems like this is the sort of "article" that was thrown together by looking at one statistic (worldwide sales of a product) and distribution of the sales of the product without understanding the companies involved (the writer obviously didn't know that Apple hasn't entered Asia except for Japan until recently. So how can you compare sales and then draw conclusions?).
Other questions like "What is a touchscreen device? Does it include devices that use stylii?" remain unanswered. Also, this whole category of touchscreen devices may be quite recent as the other cell-phone manufacturers are reacting to the iPhone. (Prior to the iPhone I do not recall touchscreens being used except for Palm devices). So it is quite possible that Apple has a large share of the market WHERE IT IS COMPETING.
You ever see the comic strip with Dilbert competing with Zazu the monkey? Dilbert thinks he's got him licked as they sit side by side at their computers furiously working away (to impress the PHB). Then Dilbert notices that Zazu is going faster than he is! He realizes he's got an unfair advantage; Zazu can use his TAIL to operate the mouse and keep both "hands" (do monkeys have hands?) on the keyboard.
"I felt the jaws of evolution close around me" - Dilbert
I dunno, sarcasm is a pretty sophisticated emotion (is it an emotion?). I'm a nerd you insensitive clod!
Ah people just kept saying "wiseass" and "babo" so I decided to concatenate the two. ;)
Sure, spec's are quite important but when you consider how much of the power of the modern PC is DEDICATED to the user interface you'll see how much Apple (and Microsoft!) value it. Think about using a word processor on the first PC maybe 30 years ago. You could type out a nice letter (okay one font) and the computer was plenty responsive. Now we have machines with literally a MILLION times the speed and memory and a HUNDRED MILLION times the disk storage. Where as (almost) all of this new power gone? For the user interface.
Don't get me wrong, spec's essential when price/performance is important. After theme parks, I now do digital film compression; I take 100,000+ frames of film (or about 5 TB of data) and mash it down to be distributed to movie theaters. Believe me, it takes a lot of horsepower to do so and I'm very familiar with bare bones user interfaces. But when I don't have to use these command line interfaces where one little mistake can cause serious damage, I'd rather user a nice GUI. And that's why I like my Mac (and iPhone).
Still your point is well taken. Would I still use an iPhone if it had significantly less features than my old Palm Treo? I doubt it.
Don't think so, like I said, the iPhone is quite a status symbol here so when I see it they're usually showing me things like their pictures on it, web-browsing etc. If it is that good of a fake I'll buy it! (I know that Mizu in China has a chinese fake out but all the menus are in chinese and the user interface is a bit different.)
You may be right but TFA doesn't say if the figures are only for the ONE market Apple's been in for any time (Japan). Wouldn't they have said "Moto and Samsung have 80% of ... Japan"? Also, the claim is not for the ENTIRE market but just for the touchscreen market, isn't the touchscreen market pretty small considering that it has only been since the iPhone came out that the other manufacturers have released serious touchscreen devices? What is the definition of a touchscreen phone? Do they include phones with stylii?
Still, I don't know, maybe they ARE only referring to the Japanese (and the newly entered Indian and Singaporean) markets. Oops! Time to sell Apple Stock! ;)