Catching Genesis mid-air with a helicopter didn't work.
If I remeber correctly, the accelerometer was put in upside down. The helicopter-catching part of the mission had nothing to do with its failure.
Victoria's Secret fashion show is one of the most popular attractions (and I do mean that in every sense of the word) on TV. And I think most people just watch the superbowl for the ads...
Kinda OT, but I wanted to get this off my chest: Is there (shouldn't there be) a way to replace this:
a.blue { color: blue; }
span.blue { color: blue; }
div#back { color: blue; }
With...
color: blue {a.blue, span.blue, div#back}
It fits more with the philosophy that colors and other styles should be in once place and one place only. CSS follows that OK right now, that is, we can put all those things in the same document, but wouldn't it be great if the document itself adhered to the same principle?
That problem seems to me one of the biggest in CSS. It makes things cluttered, take up 10 times as much space as they otherwise might, and makes for an illogical thought process. The designer doesn't think: I'll go through each element in the page and make them blue, but rather: I want this this and this to be blue. Anyway, just a thought.
You know... since many companies provide their employees with company cellphones - phoes with no local or long distance limit, I bet it's actually cheaper to use the cellphones...
Whatever. I'm not talking about a reflective device (although something at the l-point between earth and sun might help...) but more along the lines of painting the rooftops of buildings white, or something. And you have got to be KIDDING that a rising sea level won't do much. Did you know that something like 80% of humanity lives less than 500 feet above sea level? I don't think you're some right-wing whacko. I think you're a moron.
There's really two arguments to global warming. One is that it's even happening. The other is that we're causing it. My personal belief? I couldn't give a shit who's at fault. Be it flatulent cows, smog-belching cars, the sun, or... aliens from outer space - it still doesn't do anything for the first argument, that is, it's still happening regardless of who's at fault. We're still left with one of the great problems of humanity: how do we stop it?
Reducing our emissions can only help, and can indeed go a long way, but over the last 50 years its become painfully clear how impossibly difficult it is for such drastic measures to take place. It's unpopular among corporations, politicians and the general population. Not a good way to get things done. Now - if alternative power sources become more profitable and cheaper than fossil fuels, the world will jump on the bandwagon and reduce emissions in an instant.
But should we really hope that an unsure economic turnaround takes place in the next 100 years, before average global temperature rises 11K? And even then, can zero emissions stop anything? As per my previous comment in this story, a pot of boiling water will continue to boil even if its removed from the stove. There IS an alternative solution, though. It involves increasing the earth's albedo - the reflectiveness of the atmosphere and surface. Now, the earth already has a mechanism to do this: storms. Clouds have a high reflectiveness, and storms also kick up the ocean, producing whitecaps. If the temperature rises, storm activity might simply increase, in which case we might just be OK. But just as an additional safeguard (after all, we're talking about the whole planet/life/7 billion people) we might just want to come up with our own method of raising the albedo.
Flamebait, but... I'm gunna hafta bite. Chaotic systems are predictable. A pot of boiling water is chaotic. But I can make several predictions. If I turn up the heat, the water will boil faster. If I leave the pot there for a long time, all the water will be gone from the pot. The atmosphere is chaotic in that it's a bitch to predict whether it will be sunny or raining two weeks from now. But, it's become nothing but painfully obvious to those in the field, people you degrade by putting quotes around their title, that over the long term a very orderly process is occuring. It's called global warming. This latest study is just another nail in ALL our coffins.
I was given the rare opportunity to tour a reasearch reactor up in Sacramento, CA... it was used primarily to test aircraft parts by bombarding them with radioactive particles, to see how they would put up with the stresses of the upper atmosphere. Since it was a lower power reactor, we could do some crazy things like:
Walk into the reactor chamber
Look down into the core (it was glowing blue, by the way)
First, and I'm not sure about this, but I think Azureus trys to keep your ratio sane. That way, if you limit your UL to 1 kB/s, you can't download at 300 kB/s. After all, that's not very fair. Second, we're talking in kiloBYTES. I don't know of any dileup modem that can get 40 kB/s. Lastly, Unless you have a wicked net connection, I also don't think your wireless network is the bottleneck. You probably have an asynchronous connection, which means your ISP is giving you a shitty UP and fast DOWN. This configuration isn't optimal for BitTorrent, but it still should work. Your network should only slow down if its saturated, and even if you have "pathetic speeds", you may have already reached that point. I can only get about 25 kB/s of upload out of my pipe, and beyond that things start choking. Down AND up. This is on Comcast Cable, fyi.
Please. Studies can prove correlation, not causality.
And to think, Summers said that the reason there aren't woman mathematicians at Harvard is because they are biologically inferior. The same excuse was used to by the Nazis to kill Jews. I DO know better, and you should too.
Lastly, "people like myself?" I am the son of one such of these rare woman mathematicians. She had to fight for her tenure at UC Berkeley. Her name is Jenny Harrison, perhaps you've heard of her. I spent the first 7 years of my life enduring the 3 million dollars the UC Regents spent trying to ruin my mother. So sorry if I sound emotionally-charged when speaking about this. I also was recently admitted into the class of '09 at Harvard. So yeah, I'd say I'm in a position to say something. More so than you. More so than Summers. More so than any "qualified researcher" trying to validate discrimination.
If you notice, nobody claimed what he said was factually incorrect, they just said it was inappropriate.
Really? Well, here I am saying it: what he said was not only inappropriate, it was factually incorrect. I don't give a fuck how big your brain is or how fast you are. All it takes to be a great mathematician is some powerful creativity and the willpower to follow through on ideas. If anything, the reason there are few women mathematicians is because:
Boys are more aggressive than girls. when in class, boys will jump to answer questions, intimidating the girls. Math class can be very unpleasant for the non-aggressive type.
When a woman finally does get a degree, she is discriminated against by all-male faculties and tenure boards.
So yeah. Summers is wrong. Quote all the "studies" you want. The issue isn't why women professors aren't doing so well on Harvard's faculty. Shit, they're not even being given the chance. The issue is that they're not being hired in the first place.
Yay!.... Sorry, but I for one am glad that rotary phones have been tossed out the window. You can't dial nearly as fast and the size and shape of the phone is limited by the interface. But hey. Hacks are cool, so what can I say?
You know.... I've been thinking about that. How many people have good eyes by the age of 12? By the age of 40? Now, how long have glasses been around? I submit that many/most people of old couldn't see the sky very well due their own poor vision.
That's just plain stupid. Grandpa & Grandma want to check their email and pics of the grandkids, why on earth should they require a Radeon MegaXP293823-XtremeSLI+ to do that?
I think you've touched on one of the more hilarious parts of the computer industry. It's not about what people NEED, it's what you can require them to need. Want the new security features of Longhorn? Want to do email faster? You'll need a better graphics card.
True, although it took about half an hour for an experienced locksmith to get my Series 5 BMW door open. Funny how in the computer world obviously that would be unacceptable, but for cars that's considered great...
That's strange, because when I unlimit my upload, it saturates at around 20 KBps and my download stays around 20 KBps too... but when I limit my upload to 5 or 10 KBps, my download saturates to around 300 KBps. This is with the standard BitTorrent client on OS X...
I can attest that the need for a Dual G5 for smooth HDTV playback is utterly ridiculous. I have a dual 1 ghz G4 and HDTV is just fine, in 1080i. This is with Safari, Mail and iTunes open as well... Getting a good signal, on the other hand, is a problem. Does anybody have reccomendations on what Antenna to buy? I live in Berkeley, so the signal I'm getting is coming from San Francisco, which is across the bay. ~20 miles...
Slashdot Mirror
Catching Genesis mid-air with a helicopter didn't work.
If I remeber correctly, the accelerometer was put in upside down. The helicopter-catching part of the mission had nothing to do with its failure.
Victoria's Secret fashion show is one of the most popular attractions (and I do mean that in every sense of the word) on TV. And I think most people just watch the superbowl for the ads...
With...
It fits more with the philosophy that colors and other styles should be in once place and one place only. CSS follows that OK right now, that is, we can put all those things in the same document, but wouldn't it be great if the document itself adhered to the same principle?
That problem seems to me one of the biggest in CSS. It makes things cluttered, take up 10 times as much space as they otherwise might, and makes for an illogical thought process. The designer doesn't think: I'll go through each element in the page and make them blue, but rather: I want this this and this to be blue. Anyway, just a thought.
You know... since many companies provide their employees with company cellphones - phoes with no local or long distance limit, I bet it's actually cheaper to use the cellphones...
pr0n. (that is a word, right?)
Well, yeah, you know - us ugly nerds are always cracking them.
Whatever. I'm not talking about a reflective device (although something at the l-point between earth and sun might help...) but more along the lines of painting the rooftops of buildings white, or something. And you have got to be KIDDING that a rising sea level won't do much. Did you know that something like 80% of humanity lives less than 500 feet above sea level? I don't think you're some right-wing whacko. I think you're a moron.
Reducing our emissions can only help, and can indeed go a long way, but over the last 50 years its become painfully clear how impossibly difficult it is for such drastic measures to take place. It's unpopular among corporations, politicians and the general population. Not a good way to get things done. Now - if alternative power sources become more profitable and cheaper than fossil fuels, the world will jump on the bandwagon and reduce emissions in an instant.
But should we really hope that an unsure economic turnaround takes place in the next 100 years, before average global temperature rises 11K? And even then, can zero emissions stop anything? As per my previous comment in this story, a pot of boiling water will continue to boil even if its removed from the stove. There IS an alternative solution, though. It involves increasing the earth's albedo - the reflectiveness of the atmosphere and surface. Now, the earth already has a mechanism to do this: storms. Clouds have a high reflectiveness, and storms also kick up the ocean, producing whitecaps. If the temperature rises, storm activity might simply increase, in which case we might just be OK. But just as an additional safeguard (after all, we're talking about the whole planet/life/7 billion people) we might just want to come up with our own method of raising the albedo.
Flamebait, but... I'm gunna hafta bite. Chaotic systems are predictable. A pot of boiling water is chaotic. But I can make several predictions. If I turn up the heat, the water will boil faster. If I leave the pot there for a long time, all the water will be gone from the pot. The atmosphere is chaotic in that it's a bitch to predict whether it will be sunny or raining two weeks from now. But, it's become nothing but painfully obvious to those in the field, people you degrade by putting quotes around their title, that over the long term a very orderly process is occuring. It's called global warming. This latest study is just another nail in ALL our coffins.
Pretty freaking cool, imo.
Really? You sure do a nice job covering that up; It's hardly noticable.
First, and I'm not sure about this, but I think Azureus trys to keep your ratio sane. That way, if you limit your UL to 1 kB/s, you can't download at 300 kB/s. After all, that's not very fair. Second, we're talking in kiloBYTES. I don't know of any dileup modem that can get 40 kB/s. Lastly, Unless you have a wicked net connection, I also don't think your wireless network is the bottleneck. You probably have an asynchronous connection, which means your ISP is giving you a shitty UP and fast DOWN. This configuration isn't optimal for BitTorrent, but it still should work. Your network should only slow down if its saturated, and even if you have "pathetic speeds", you may have already reached that point. I can only get about 25 kB/s of upload out of my pipe, and beyond that things start choking. Down AND up. This is on Comcast Cable, fyi.
And to think, Summers said that the reason there aren't woman mathematicians at Harvard is because they are biologically inferior. The same excuse was used to by the Nazis to kill Jews. I DO know better, and you should too.
Lastly, "people like myself?" I am the son of one such of these rare woman mathematicians. She had to fight for her tenure at UC Berkeley. Her name is Jenny Harrison, perhaps you've heard of her. I spent the first 7 years of my life enduring the 3 million dollars the UC Regents spent trying to ruin my mother. So sorry if I sound emotionally-charged when speaking about this. I also was recently admitted into the class of '09 at Harvard. So yeah, I'd say I'm in a position to say something. More so than you. More so than Summers. More so than any "qualified researcher" trying to validate discrimination.
Really? Well, here I am saying it: what he said was not only inappropriate, it was factually incorrect. I don't give a fuck how big your brain is or how fast you are. All it takes to be a great mathematician is some powerful creativity and the willpower to follow through on ideas. If anything, the reason there are few women mathematicians is because:
- Boys are more aggressive than girls. when in class, boys will jump to answer questions, intimidating the girls. Math class can be very unpleasant for the non-aggressive type.
- When a woman finally does get a degree, she is discriminated against by all-male faculties and tenure boards.
So yeah. Summers is wrong. Quote all the "studies" you want. The issue isn't why women professors aren't doing so well on Harvard's faculty. Shit, they're not even being given the chance. The issue is that they're not being hired in the first place.Hey, at least I read TFA! (or, at least clicked on the link. What? You want me to UNDERSTAND it now? sheesh.)
www.apple.com/trailers works fine... I don't know what he's talking about.
Yay! .... Sorry, but I for one am glad that rotary phones have been tossed out the window. You can't dial nearly as fast and the size and shape of the phone is limited by the interface. But hey. Hacks are cool, so what can I say?
You know.... I've been thinking about that. How many people have good eyes by the age of 12? By the age of 40? Now, how long have glasses been around? I submit that many/most people of old couldn't see the sky very well due their own poor vision.
...if they didn't let him in? :)
I think you've touched on one of the more hilarious parts of the computer industry. It's not about what people NEED, it's what you can require them to need. Want the new security features of Longhorn? Want to do email faster? You'll need a better graphics card.
True, although it took about half an hour for an experienced locksmith to get my Series 5 BMW door open. Funny how in the computer world obviously that would be unacceptable, but for cars that's considered great...
Pothead: *takes a drag from joint* "Hey kid, what are YOU in for?"
Pirate: "20 years. The new Britney Spears album."
That's strange, because when I unlimit my upload, it saturates at around 20 KBps and my download stays around 20 KBps too... but when I limit my upload to 5 or 10 KBps, my download saturates to around 300 KBps. This is with the standard BitTorrent client on OS X...
I can attest that the need for a Dual G5 for smooth HDTV playback is utterly ridiculous. I have a dual 1 ghz G4 and HDTV is just fine, in 1080i. This is with Safari, Mail and iTunes open as well... Getting a good signal, on the other hand, is a problem. Does anybody have reccomendations on what Antenna to buy? I live in Berkeley, so the signal I'm getting is coming from San Francisco, which is across the bay. ~20 miles...
If it's running WinXP without any service packs, it WILL be the fastest root. :)