There is a bunch more to this, which never seems to make the press coverage.
Radarsat2 was originally to have been a US-Canada partnership. But then the US realized that it would provide the kind of coverage of the US that the US now has of other countries - something it decided was unacceptable. The US withdrew, refused to supply some key components, and refused to provide the launch.
The satellite was redesigned to use alternate components, and launched on a European rocket.
So now the US is trying an alternate approach to recovering control of the situation.
Speaking has one who was "forced" to change - a broken machine, and not enough time to investigate alternatives thoroughly - I can confidently say you don't want Vista!
Network problems, application problems, all sorts of unsupported hardware, no help from MS or other suppliers, not enough knowledge in the community to help, etc., etc.
Let someone else, like me unfortunately, be the guinea pig.
As the article clearly says, the problem here is not with the climate change models, but with the models predicting how the environment will respond to the change. The models predicted a much slower response to the changes that is proving to be the case.
At least an introductory course in numerical analysis should be included. I know, I know - no one does arithmetic with computers. But somehow, in my career, it has arisen time and tine again.
You've obviously never watched snow melt on your front lawn, or stood on a melting glacier.
First, the pack ice is full of cracks and crevices, so "rivers" would disappear into them. The ice melts preferentially on the north side of these cracks and ridges, the side facing the sun.
Second, when ice melts in the sun, it tends to form "pinacles" of crunchy ice (presumably a result of variations in the surface resulting in shadows, surface dirt capturing more heat, etc.) Water melts at top, and runs down or falls down into the ice. The heat of the water, and to some degree the kinetic energy of the drops, melts some of the ice further down. If the layer is thick enough, the water forms small pools and re-feezes, thus forming the dense ice that "normally" lasts all year; if enough melts, a hole forms and the water disappears into the sea (or, on land, forms rivers that flow out from the bottom of the glacier.)
Melting from the bottom also obviously has a significant effect, since much of the sea water is obviously warmer than the ice. There is "normally" a state of equilibrium, with water melting at about the same rate snow falls on top, averaged over a few years. Right now, more is melting than freezing.
"countries like Singapore, Britain and Taiwan."
Yhere has been a lot of publicity recently about researchers moving to Canada from the US. I don't think of Canada as "like Singapore, Britain and Taiwan." Can someone explain the similarities, beyond the directly related facts of supporting research and mot the US?
I have written such a process, so I know it can be done.
The purpose of ISO 9000 is not to tell you what your process is. You can use any process you want, as long as your customers will accept it. What ISO 9000 requires is that you be able to prove you are following it. If your process requires code reviews, you must have recorded minutes describing the results, and the follow-up, for each one. If you require iteration plans, you must keep records of those plans. If you require the use code analysis tools, you have to record the results of the use of those tools regularly, to show you are meeting whatever benchmarks you choose. And so on. You do whatever you want - just prove that you really are doing it.
Put in your documented process everything that you do that you can document as having been done, and that you (as a group) want to keep doing. Do not put anything in your process that you cannot document. Keep a separate description of "best practices" - things that you expect developers to do, but that you do not want to insist on until you are more comfortable with them. In time, some of these methods may migrate into your documented process, but only when you are sure you want to be held accountable for following them.
You mean, games are like every other art form ever developed? Most authors follow the patterns that predecessors have created, but every so often someone with a spark of genius creates something new? What a revelation!
I saw it a few weeks ago. The show was good - the Balrog was amazing - but the major criticisms are right. It is too long. The songs are unmemberable. It spends too long on side issues, at the cost of the plot.
This is a show that needed workshopping - trial, review and fixup. Unfortunately, at $27M in production costs, the only way to do that was to find somewhere with a big enough theatre and audience to put it on and pay some of the costs. Now they'll fix it up, remount it on London, and try again. It will probably still need work, but the next version will no doubt be a lot better. Then they'll put together a road version, and we'll get to pay again to see what we should have seen in the first place.
You are right that the current physics is incorrect. Barring divine revelation, there will never be a provably correct theory. However, current theories are provably accurate to within at least eight significant digits, so they are easily sufficient for the purposes of the current subject.
Shut down the US web hosting business!
The US economy is in such great shape that every opportunity should be used to transfer businesses out of the country. It's only fair.
I've thought about the same thing for years.
It seems to me that a standad DC cord, with several connectors that would provide various voltages at specified currents, could make a lot of opportunities available. Standard DC transformers, with several outlets, could be used. Planes, etc., could provide standard plugs. Conference tables could be built with plugs provided for each seat. Battery replacements would look like standard batteries, with a cord that would plug into the standard outlet. Etc., etc.
It seems to me that the place to pursue this is IEEE. I don't think Slashdot can help.
Who gets to decide whether a company has to follow a "local law"?
Most of the "free world" rejects the U.S. attempts to blockade Cuba. Most countries have "local laws" that prohibit U.S. subsidiaries in their countries from obeying U.S. laws that require them to obey the blockade. Most countries complete reject the notion that U.S. laws apply in their contries.
That is a long way from the numbers I have seen quoted, when the full costs are included, included the production of the raw materials, the dispoables used in production, etc.
If your number is accurate, the cost of biodiesel should be about half that of conventional fuel, not double.
How did I make the costs out to be simple?
The cost of most (all?) products comes from two sources - energy and intellectual property. To the extent that products are commodities (i.e. low IP costs), their price reflects the energy required to make them. Biodiesel is not yet a commodity in that sense, but getting close, and the reason it is expensive is the energy required to create and distribute it is high - probably more than the energy using it will produce.
If a commodity product is not economically sensible, it is probably not environmentally sensible.
That doesn't necessarily mean that it is not right to produce it - experience (i.e. an IP component) may reduce the energy required in time. Slashdot had a story last week about a new idea in the production of biodiesel that may reduce the energy required.
Well for one thing, who would pay for it?
Pollution happens because there are economic incentives to pollution. There are few economic incentives to clean up - unless society imposes them, which is extremely unlikely in the current political environment.
This is known as "The Tragedy of the Commons" - look it up.
Slashdot Mirror
There is a bunch more to this, which never seems to make the press coverage. Radarsat2 was originally to have been a US-Canada partnership. But then the US realized that it would provide the kind of coverage of the US that the US now has of other countries - something it decided was unacceptable. The US withdrew, refused to supply some key components, and refused to provide the launch. The satellite was redesigned to use alternate components, and launched on a European rocket. So now the US is trying an alternate approach to recovering control of the situation.
Speaking has one who was "forced" to change - a broken machine, and not enough time to investigate alternatives thoroughly - I can confidently say you don't want Vista! Network problems, application problems, all sorts of unsupported hardware, no help from MS or other suppliers, not enough knowledge in the community to help, etc., etc. Let someone else, like me unfortunately, be the guinea pig.
As the article clearly says, the problem here is not with the climate change models, but with the models predicting how the environment will respond to the change. The models predicted a much slower response to the changes that is proving to be the case.
Would that be a CFL football field, or one of those puny NFL ones?
At least an introductory course in numerical analysis should be included. I know, I know - no one does arithmetic with computers. But somehow, in my career, it has arisen time and tine again.
Why is this "good news" or "bad news"? It is simply (evidence of) facts. Facts are what they are - there is no "good" or "bad" about them.
My employer doesn't, because none of his employees has an SSN.
First, the pack ice is full of cracks and crevices, so "rivers" would disappear into them. The ice melts preferentially on the north side of these cracks and ridges, the side facing the sun.
Second, when ice melts in the sun, it tends to form "pinacles" of crunchy ice (presumably a result of variations in the surface resulting in shadows, surface dirt capturing more heat, etc.) Water melts at top, and runs down or falls down into the ice. The heat of the water, and to some degree the kinetic energy of the drops, melts some of the ice further down. If the layer is thick enough, the water forms small pools and re-feezes, thus forming the dense ice that "normally" lasts all year; if enough melts, a hole forms and the water disappears into the sea (or, on land, forms rivers that flow out from the bottom of the glacier.)
Melting from the bottom also obviously has a significant effect, since much of the sea water is obviously warmer than the ice. There is "normally" a state of equilibrium, with water melting at about the same rate snow falls on top, averaged over a few years. Right now, more is melting than freezing.
"countries like Singapore, Britain and Taiwan." Yhere has been a lot of publicity recently about researchers moving to Canada from the US. I don't think of Canada as "like Singapore, Britain and Taiwan." Can someone explain the similarities, beyond the directly related facts of supporting research and mot the US?
The purpose of ISO 9000 is not to tell you what your process is. You can use any process you want, as long as your customers will accept it. What ISO 9000 requires is that you be able to prove you are following it. If your process requires code reviews, you must have recorded minutes describing the results, and the follow-up, for each one. If you require iteration plans, you must keep records of those plans. If you require the use code analysis tools, you have to record the results of the use of those tools regularly, to show you are meeting whatever benchmarks you choose. And so on. You do whatever you want - just prove that you really are doing it.
Put in your documented process everything that you do that you can document as having been done, and that you (as a group) want to keep doing. Do not put anything in your process that you cannot document. Keep a separate description of "best practices" - things that you expect developers to do, but that you do not want to insist on until you are more comfortable with them. In time, some of these methods may migrate into your documented process, but only when you are sure you want to be held accountable for following them.
You mean, games are like every other art form ever developed? Most authors follow the patterns that predecessors have created, but every so often someone with a spark of genius creates something new? What a revelation!
This is a show that needed workshopping - trial, review and fixup. Unfortunately, at $27M in production costs, the only way to do that was to find somewhere with a big enough theatre and audience to put it on and pay some of the costs. Now they'll fix it up, remount it on London, and try again. It will probably still need work, but the next version will no doubt be a lot better. Then they'll put together a road version, and we'll get to pay again to see what we should have seen in the first place.
Doesn't "experiment" implies stuff like theory, hypotheses, controls - all that "science" stuff that keeps getting in the way of good conspiracies?
You are right that the current physics is incorrect. Barring divine revelation, there will never be a provably correct theory. However, current theories are provably accurate to within at least eight significant digits, so they are easily sufficient for the purposes of the current subject.
Ah - mathematics. No wonder I didn't get it. It was a long time ago, but when I studies math, "bad shape" wasn't a number.
"So Windows is in bad shape - but only by a constant, not by an order of magnitude."
Can someone explain the difference between "bad shape by a constant" and "bad shape by an order of magnitude"?
Shut down the US web hosting business! The US economy is in such great shape that every opportunity should be used to transfer businesses out of the country. It's only fair.
I've thought about the same thing for years. It seems to me that a standad DC cord, with several connectors that would provide various voltages at specified currents, could make a lot of opportunities available. Standard DC transformers, with several outlets, could be used. Planes, etc., could provide standard plugs. Conference tables could be built with plugs provided for each seat. Battery replacements would look like standard batteries, with a cord that would plug into the standard outlet. Etc., etc. It seems to me that the place to pursue this is IEEE. I don't think Slashdot can help.
Who gets to decide whether a company has to follow a "local law"? Most of the "free world" rejects the U.S. attempts to blockade Cuba. Most countries have "local laws" that prohibit U.S. subsidiaries in their countries from obeying U.S. laws that require them to obey the blockade. Most countries complete reject the notion that U.S. laws apply in their contries.
Before long, the phish won't have any money left, so the phishers will have to give up.
Rogers has lots of investments in the US. They own a large portion of the US cable industry.
That is a long way from the numbers I have seen quoted, when the full costs are included, included the production of the raw materials, the dispoables used in production, etc. If your number is accurate, the cost of biodiesel should be about half that of conventional fuel, not double.
How did I make the costs out to be simple? The cost of most (all?) products comes from two sources - energy and intellectual property. To the extent that products are commodities (i.e. low IP costs), their price reflects the energy required to make them. Biodiesel is not yet a commodity in that sense, but getting close, and the reason it is expensive is the energy required to create and distribute it is high - probably more than the energy using it will produce. If a commodity product is not economically sensible, it is probably not environmentally sensible. That doesn't necessarily mean that it is not right to produce it - experience (i.e. an IP component) may reduce the energy required in time. Slashdot had a story last week about a new idea in the production of biodiesel that may reduce the energy required.
And the primary reason it costs more is that it requires so much energy to produce it.
Well for one thing, who would pay for it? Pollution happens because there are economic incentives to pollution. There are few economic incentives to clean up - unless society imposes them, which is extremely unlikely in the current political environment. This is known as "The Tragedy of the Commons" - look it up.