Chrome already has it's own method for doing remote desktop.
It won't be supported because it will be competing directly with something Google already does.
Yeah, it's called HTTP. It even supports client-induced code upload and execution on the display server just like display postscript did (and JavaScript is a nicer programming language than PostScript), oh and it calls its display server the "client" and its client the server. You get used to it.
The study sounds like nonsense (at least as presented in this post).
Refactoring doesn't make code easier to analyze or change.... But it may make code more maintainable.
What is code maintenance, if not analyzing and changing the code??!?!
Refactoring means code gets written anew, so it becomes more maintainable because it was written by the same people who have to do the maintaining. Before the refactoring, you have to maintain crappy code written by some dude that quit last year. After the refactoring, you have to maintain crappy code written by yourself. Definitely easier.
We might see not much at all because Betelgeuse happens to be located almost exactly in the ecliptic plane (10 degrees or so below it), so at certain times of the year you can't see it because it's just 10 degrees away from the sun. It would really suck if the supernova occurred during those months. I think even Hubble can't observe that close to the sun, so you'd need a telescope in deep space, which we don't really have atm.
It seems SpaceX is relying on a trial-and-error strategy during the development of the soft landing capability of their booster much more than they (or others in the industry) do for other components or capabilities of space launch or other aeronautical systems. I don't see (unmanned) rockets or drones being developed in this fashion. Even large rockets that can achieve orbit will normally be modeled, simulated and tested component-wise to the point that they will usually work at the first or second attempt when the entire system is integrated and tested for the first time. So why is this so different here? Is it just cheaper? Or is it actually that much harder to make the rocket land softly on its own exhaust jet than to make it go into orbit?
Docker containers are like VM's but smaller. I think what it means is that a Windows server / VM will be able to run dozens-hundreds of Windows micro-services inside a Docker for Windows infrastructure. Or basically once finished you as a developer can now write Windows apps that don't need to install and will run on any Windows, no more version dependencies! Just like Docker is doing for Linux today.
Yeah, but wouldn't it have to be rewritten from scratch on Windows? AFAIK there is no chroot, cgroups or anything like that in Windows (I guess there might be equivalents). And I have no idea what you would do about the registry blob in this scenario.
If all it is, is a battery, then by itself it would be worth almost as much as cold fusion, as it can store and produce 600+ horsepower for an hour (1.5MW hours).
It doesn't store it, it has a power supply (even officially). And it emits the 1.5MWh over a period of 32 days, not one hour. And oh yeah, it never seems to work unless Rossi is present to "supervise" the thing.
Isn't anything is cheating or not cheating relative to a constant set of rules that are applied consistently? The current set of rules happens to allow wind-cutting and refreshment points along the track, but not 1000m downhill slopes or using a motorcycle.
Doesn't seem any less "meaningful" than any other sports activities, e.g. baseball, car racing, or the Superbowl. Myself, I find it pretty damn impressive that anybody could run 42 kilometers at a speed that I couldn't sustain over 500 meters.
How so? He's been saying this for years now, in one form or another. And as a society you're lucky to have some crazy people like Musk to make up for legions of bean-counter types.
I suppose the number of trips to deliver a million humans to the Red Planet could be reduced if they could be convinced to breed once they arrive there.
That would defeat the "genetically diverse" requirement.
The device encryption feature is apparently designed to always use the lock screen password. So you're forced to have such a password, which you have to enter every time the device comes out of sleep mode, AND (much worse) it breaks essential apps like SkipLock that want to disable the lock screen under certain conditions, e.g. when you're within range of a known WiFi network, thereby relieving you of the need to enter your PIN about 5,000 times a day while you're sitting on your couch at home.
The probe is in orbit around the comet, and a quite peculiar orbit too. So regardless of what the comet does, from the reference point of the probe, it is "rotating".
I don't think so. The comet may not be rotating on its own. Which would mean that all patches of its surface rest in an inertial frame (at least if you ignore the rotation around the sun -- which shouldn't have much influence during the short timespan of a landing). If that were the case, it would make the landing easier because the lander's velocity relative to the surface would stay constant during unpowered flight phases.
I never understood those head trackers. I mean, if I have a screen in front of me and turn my head to the right, then the display may very well change but I'm now looking to the right so won't see it (or need to look out of the corner of my eye). If instead I have a bank of monitors, so that I could see any adapted view - it wouldn't need to change the display!
Email is actually a tremendous, decentralized, open platform
Right, because people understand and care about that.
You could say people didn't understand or care about the web being a decentralized, open platform either. But that was still the reason why it took off, and ultimately the (indirect) reason why everybody started using it.
The main difference is that email is a (suite of) protocol(s), while all those other things are essentially web sites (with a mobile app, and a REST API if you're lucky). Which means that with email, you can deploy a complete implementation yourself, in your own organization or wherever you want, without having to rely on specific 3rd party services or software. This may ultimately make email last longer, because it is truly decentralized. It also means that email can scale up and down effortlessly. You won't send your cron job errors to Facebook or Twitter (or Asana).
Now, Post-Fukushima, plants are adding response capabilities for apocalyptic type scenarios even though three is nobody that can provide an example of how such an event may happen for the particular site short of some major war type event. Fukushima was simple...don't put reactors that were not design to operate underwater where they can find themselves underwater. Given the situation, the outcome was quite easily predictable.
Can you cite any pre-Fukushima regulation that mandates this? Because if you can't, then that's a case of "hindsight is 20/20". I'm pretty sure the type of thing that happened at Fukushima has always been thought to be a "there is nobody that can provide an example of how such an event may happen for the particular site" type of scenario -- until it did happen.
Come on! In fourteen years you can develop your OS from scratch. Bearing in mind that Perl is noting more than a scripting language, what the hell have they been doing?
If I had to make a totally uninformed guess, I'd say they probably read and learnt so much about languages, interpreters and compilers and stuff that they're now totally insecure as to how to proceed.
I don't think anybody can give you am exact date on when coal power will be phased out
Yeah, because nobody knows how you could run the grid without them. You certainly can't run it just on solar+wind+some measly storage capacities on the same scale as today's. If Germany were to run on solar+wind plants alone all the time, they'd need the ability to store one or two weeks of electricity consumption, which amounts to 10..20 TWh -- that's at least 200 (two hundred) times as much capacity as is installed nationwide today. Which means you'd need totally different storage technologies, some of which you may have to invent first. Nobody is sure how (and whether) this might work.
but the energy transition effort enjoys fairly broad support among the German public
Which doesn't change the physics. And, what actually "enjoys broad support" is getting rid of all the nuke plants. So the only date that was fixed early on in this whole effort is the day when the last nuke plant would be shut off. Because not doing that would've cost Merkel her reelection. Everything else isn't nearly as important.
Slashdot Mirror
Chrome already has it's own method for doing remote desktop.
It won't be supported because it will be competing directly with something Google already does.
Yeah, it's called HTTP. It even supports client-induced code upload and execution on the display server just like display postscript did (and JavaScript is a nicer programming language than PostScript), oh and it calls its display server the "client" and its client the server. You get used to it.
The study sounds like nonsense (at least as presented in this post).
Refactoring doesn't make code easier to analyze or change.... But it may make code more maintainable.
What is code maintenance, if not analyzing and changing the code??!?!
Refactoring means code gets written anew, so it becomes more maintainable because it was written by the same people who have to do the maintaining. Before the refactoring, you have to maintain crappy code written by some dude that quit last year. After the refactoring, you have to maintain crappy code written by yourself. Definitely easier.
We might see not much at all because Betelgeuse happens to be located almost exactly in the ecliptic plane (10 degrees or so below it), so at certain times of the year you can't see it because it's just 10 degrees away from the sun. It would really suck if the supernova occurred during those months. I think even Hubble can't observe that close to the sun, so you'd need a telescope in deep space, which we don't really have atm.
It seems SpaceX is relying on a trial-and-error strategy during the development of the soft landing capability of their booster much more than they (or others in the industry) do for other components or capabilities of space launch or other aeronautical systems. I don't see (unmanned) rockets or drones being developed in this fashion. Even large rockets that can achieve orbit will normally be modeled, simulated and tested component-wise to the point that they will usually work at the first or second attempt when the entire system is integrated and tested for the first time. So why is this so different here? Is it just cheaper? Or is it actually that much harder to make the rocket land softly on its own exhaust jet than to make it go into orbit?
Correcting rough seas doesn't seem to be child's play.
How do you shoot up twelve people in the middle of Paris then get away? Wtf?
What's more, it all happened at place that was supposedly under "police protection"...
Docker containers are like VM's but smaller. I think what it means is that a Windows server / VM will be able to run dozens-hundreds of Windows micro-services inside a Docker for Windows infrastructure. Or basically once finished you as a developer can now write Windows apps that don't need to install and will run on any Windows, no more version dependencies! Just like Docker is doing for Linux today.
Yeah, but wouldn't it have to be rewritten from scratch on Windows? AFAIK there is no chroot, cgroups or anything like that in Windows (I guess there might be equivalents). And I have no idea what you would do about the registry blob in this scenario.
it emits the 1.5MWh over a period of 32 days, not one hour
FYI 1.5MWh running for 32 days is 1152MW.
No, it's a little shy of 2 kW.
It doesn't store it, it has a power supply (even officially). And it emits the 1.5MWh over a period of 32 days, not one hour. And oh yeah, it never seems to work unless Rossi is present to "supervise" the thing.
Isn't "Cutting the Wind" cheating?
Isn't anything is cheating or not cheating relative to a constant set of rules that are applied consistently? The current set of rules happens to allow wind-cutting and refreshment points along the track, but not 1000m downhill slopes or using a motorcycle.
Doesn't seem any less "meaningful" than any other sports activities, e.g. baseball, car racing, or the Superbowl. Myself, I find it pretty damn impressive that anybody could run 42 kilometers at a speed that I couldn't sustain over 500 meters.
That would be Cold Fusion. The type of fusion where the energy goes most nearly into electricity.
That's aneutronic fusion, not cold fusion (it tends to be even hotter than neutronic fusion).
I think Musk just jumped the shark.
How so? He's been saying this for years now, in one form or another. And as a society you're lucky to have some crazy people like Musk to make up for legions of bean-counter types.
I suppose the number of trips to deliver a million humans to the Red Planet could be reduced if they could be convinced to breed once they arrive there.
That would defeat the "genetically diverse" requirement.
Maybe they should apply for a job at an organization that's under "intense scrutiny" by the government anyway. The ACLU maybe?
See also https://code.google.com/p/andr...
Unfortunately, this is a total show stopper for full device encryption.
The probe is in orbit around the comet, and a quite peculiar orbit too. So regardless of what the comet does, from the reference point of the probe, it is "rotating".
I don't think so. The comet may not be rotating on its own. Which would mean that all patches of its surface rest in an inertial frame (at least if you ignore the rotation around the sun -- which shouldn't have much influence during the short timespan of a landing). If that were the case, it would make the landing easier because the lander's velocity relative to the surface would stay constant during unpowered flight phases.
I never understood those head trackers. I mean, if I have a screen in front of me and turn my head to the right, then the display may very well change but I'm now looking to the right so won't see it (or need to look out of the corner of my eye). If instead I have a bank of monitors, so that I could see any adapted view - it wouldn't need to change the display!
http://youtu.be/Jd3-eiid-Uw
Email is actually a tremendous, decentralized, open platform
Right, because people understand and care about that.
You could say people didn't understand or care about the web being a decentralized, open platform either. But that was still the reason why it took off, and ultimately the (indirect) reason why everybody started using it.
The main difference is that email is a (suite of) protocol(s), while all those other things are essentially web sites (with a mobile app, and a REST API if you're lucky). Which means that with email, you can deploy a complete implementation yourself, in your own organization or wherever you want, without having to rely on specific 3rd party services or software. This may ultimately make email last longer, because it is truly decentralized. It also means that email can scale up and down effortlessly. You won't send your cron job errors to Facebook or Twitter (or Asana).
That was quite interesting, thank you.
Now, Post-Fukushima, plants are adding response capabilities for apocalyptic type scenarios even though three is nobody that can provide an example of how such an event may happen for the particular site short of some major war type event. Fukushima was simple...don't put reactors that were not design to operate underwater where they can find themselves underwater. Given the situation, the outcome was quite easily predictable.
Can you cite any pre-Fukushima regulation that mandates this? Because if you can't, then that's a case of "hindsight is 20/20". I'm pretty sure the type of thing that happened at Fukushima has always been thought to be a "there is nobody that can provide an example of how such an event may happen for the particular site" type of scenario -- until it did happen.
Come on! In fourteen years you can develop your OS from scratch. Bearing in mind that Perl is noting more than a scripting language, what the hell have they been doing?
If I had to make a totally uninformed guess, I'd say they probably read and learnt so much about languages, interpreters and compilers and stuff that they're now totally insecure as to how to proceed.
I don't think anybody can give you am exact date on when coal power will be phased out
Yeah, because nobody knows how you could run the grid without them. You certainly can't run it just on solar+wind+some measly storage capacities on the same scale as today's. If Germany were to run on solar+wind plants alone all the time, they'd need the ability to store one or two weeks of electricity consumption, which amounts to 10..20 TWh -- that's at least 200 (two hundred) times as much capacity as is installed nationwide today. Which means you'd need totally different storage technologies, some of which you may have to invent first. Nobody is sure how (and whether) this might work.
but the energy transition effort enjoys fairly broad support among the German public
Which doesn't change the physics. And, what actually "enjoys broad support" is getting rid of all the nuke plants. So the only date that was fixed early on in this whole effort is the day when the last nuke plant would be shut off. Because not doing that would've cost Merkel her reelection. Everything else isn't nearly as important.
If she can't tell you she doesn't want it unplugged then it isn't.
She is fully conscious, so she can tell him. "Telling" doesn't require verbal communication ability.