How about being really paranoid and utilizing all the reasonable tools at your disposal ?
I mean, run critical checks through all the SSL/crypto layers that are available on the system. Have Botan, PolarSSL built in, optionally check with OpenSSL, CryptoAPI, if present.
Android is not a real Linux distro like people understand the term.
Then its a problem with people not understanding the term. Loads and loads of embedded linux distros dont include desktop stuff, are using different core C libraries, dont ship stuff like X, bash, dash and so on.
Look into distros like Montavista.
Most Linuxes are GNU/Linux, including such things as a standard libc. Android uses its own.
Meh ? There is a multitude of libc's out there, GLIBC is not the only one. Look up EGLIBC ( debian standard now ) , uClibc, standard on uClinux distros, dietlibc, newlib.
The fact that Android uses a BSD-derived Bionic C library for core userspace, does not make the system any less "Linux".
Functionally, a lot of linux systems dont ship X, and dont ship loads of other userspace libraries that you may think are "orthodox".
Lots of linux systems use busybox for almost all userspace functionality.
Well, all you are saying is true, but this doesnt mean these devices wont have applications
http://urbanaero.com/Frame-whatsnew.htm
Perfect craft for med evac duties. It provides capabilities that regular helicopters just cant do. Short flight time is just one constraint that they'll accept for these mission profiles.
But it does. Im speaking about technical feasibility of an application. You need to hit a certain efficiency benchmark per surface area to make some applications ( of photovoltaics ) possible in the first place. For instance 24-hour stratospheric solar flight, i.e. solar-powered UAVs.
You really need to have a certain level of power output per surface area, because there are low bar limits on how little power you can use to fly reliably. These limits are set by other engineering hard limits like battery energy densities, frame construction material strength per weight and so on.
Economics enter the picture later, especially when talking about military applications.
And solar-powered UAVs in stratosphere with indefinite loiter time are sought by basically all applications currently performed by satellites ( surveillance, imaging, communications ).
This gives ample playing room for economics, as satellites are usually top of the line tech, with best efficiencies in every aspect, gold plated.
More efficient technology does not mean wider applications irrespective of cost.
In some cases it does, because some applications can only be enabled when power output per limited surface area is above certain critical treshhold. Solar planes, solar blimps, solar-charged portable electronic devices to lesser degree.
Efficiency DOES matter to enable lots of applications, especially when your sunlight-exposed real estate is at premium. For example, PHEVs and EVs getting their top-up charge from roof-mounted panels, solar panels on top of laptop cases and so on.
Most importantly it matters for applications like solar flight. Solar planes of course wouldnt use heavy GaAs silicon cells, but the best of the breed thin-film cells.
The Apollo engineers had a pretty accurate idea of what they were setting out to accomplish.
Yes, a limited political stunt, with almost no real effects to the humanity at large. . while Columbus stumbled across the New World despite sheer ignorance and wrongheadedness.
Yes, and opened up a whole new continent ( for western world anyway ) for trade and colonization, almost immediately bringing massive economic gains for the homeland, and enabling people to migrate to new lands later on and settle there.. .
So yes, diametrically opposite.. .
Apollo _could_ have had similar effects as Columbus voyage, but it was done by government-mandated socialist organization, which never intended to open up space for the rest of the people. Free enterprise never had a chance.. .
Theres a way to do it better, but it requires radical rethinking on how we do things in space.. http://www.nasawatch.com/archives/2009/06/why_the_moon_he.html
What was their ROI again?
Musks and Carmack's ventures are profitable already, by their own accounts.
There are pioneers in every field. Investing in personal computing didnt occur to a lot of people either, a while back.
You did not get the memo?
People with significant amounts of money like John Carmack, Jeff Bezos, Elon Musk, Paul Allen have thought otherwise, and have invested in manned spaceflight.
By necessity; free enterprise has never produced a viable manned orbital space programme..
Have you looked into the matter of WHY ? Without giving away too much, when you research the matter, you'll run into interesting terms like obstructionism, turf protection, pork politics, ITAR, entrenched interests and common misconceptions, perpetuated by certain groups and so on.
Nevertheless, there are several companies currently on track to start operating manned spaceflight vehicles, and when commercially successful with orbital versions thereof later. SpaceX is shooting for manned orbital from the get-go, with or without government subsidies.
and really struggles with unmanned ones.
Huh ?? Do you have any idea about the volume of the global commercial launch market, every year ? It isnt a "programme", as you put it. It a transportation market like any other. Currently with military lineage going back to ICBMs, but commercial market nevertheless.
What do you mean by "really struggles" ?
SpaceX has designed Falcon 9 for manned flight from the outset, and both Atlas and Delta have been considered as manned launchers in various stages ( OSP program ). With slight upgrades, a launch escape system and a reasonably small payload/capsule, they will be even safer.
They are certainly safer than current Shuttle track record ( 1 in 69 loss of crew ). Hey, Redstone and Atlas were considered safe enough at some point in time, with little to no track record, EELVs have quite a bit of successful launch history behind them.
Anything currently flying, with demonstrated success rate is safer bet than another dreamed-up rocket on paper, with all the unknowns of it, no ?
Seriously, NASA (and most space programs in general) should have one crucial long term goal: Getting us off this ball of rock and inhabiting other ones
NASA is a government agency ( an arthritic one ), government agencies don't colonize. Especially when international law explicitly forbids that.
What most people miss in 2001: Space Odyssey, are the logos on the space plane and Space Station V itself, where dr. Heywood flies to . They read "Pan American" and "Hilton Hotels" accordingly, NOT NASA, RSA or any other *SA.
Ironically, when time called for beating the communists to the moon, the great U.S. of A. did not tap into free enterprise, but created a huge socialist government-run space business, which 40 years later still thinks it should be running a space trucking line.
Problem is, that the lines between Laptop->Netbook->Tablet->Mid->PocketPC->SmartPhone are blurring. Where do you draw the line ? There are a bunch of ARM-powered MIDs, netbooks and tablets etc coming out in short order, and they probably will gain a pretty big market, considering the battery life and price...
Counterpoint all you want, but look at how Japanese, Chinese and French auto- and battery makers are flocking to Bolivia to get a hold of their lithium salt fields. ( google news, bolivia, lithium ) The thing is, while some resources may be abundant here or there ( like desert area in some parts of the world, or lithium fields in another ), nations and corporations would still be very glad to open up supplies of these resources that are not dependent on foreign governments, not controlled by anyone else and so on. In fact, Japan is in fight with China over rare earth metals right now for their industrial needs, and rare earth metals are not that rare actually.
Read up on the current fight between Japan and China for rare earth metals, also the rush for Bolivian lithium salt fields. Or look up on who is controlling the supply of most of platinum group metals. There are things called "strategic resources", and great economic powers sometime desire independent access to these, even at great cost. Chinese get that by the way, and securing access to new resources off earth is one of their main stated goals of space program. They are looking at the moon as a new continent. Some others are as well, http://www.8cproject.com/
Dude, you are not testing on any portable/mobile/embedded browser at all ? Like Sony PSP or Nintendo Wii, Nokia n800, Opera Mobile or Fennec ? You have it easy... Because on PC i can likely switch a browser if i have issues , but on an embedded-ish / portable device i cant, and thats where most websites fail.
Slashdot Mirror
Adobe called, they want their trademark back. And they dont want to be banned.
How about being really paranoid and utilizing all the reasonable tools at your disposal ?
I mean, run critical checks through all the SSL/crypto layers that are available on the system. Have Botan, PolarSSL built in, optionally check with OpenSSL, CryptoAPI, if present.
"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a rigged demo".
Just that on a small touch screen device, these things are utterly useless without a GUI wrapping the functions. And the point was about GUI apps.
A better argument would have been "They should have just tried to improve GNOME Mobile/Maemo/ Ubuntu Mobile/OpenEmbedded/Hildon" instead.
Android is not a real Linux distro like people understand the term.
Then its a problem with people not understanding the term. Loads and loads of embedded linux distros dont include desktop stuff, are using different core C libraries, dont ship stuff like X, bash, dash and so on.
Look into distros like Montavista.
Most Linuxes are GNU/Linux, including such things as a standard libc. Android uses its own. Meh ? There is a multitude of libc's out there, GLIBC is not the only one. Look up EGLIBC ( debian standard now ) , uClibc, standard on uClinux distros, dietlibc, newlib. The fact that Android uses a BSD-derived Bionic C library for core userspace, does not make the system any less "Linux". Functionally, a lot of linux systems dont ship X, and dont ship loads of other userspace libraries that you may think are "orthodox". Lots of linux systems use busybox for almost all userspace functionality.
If they have that much useless detail on everyone, chances are they won't be able to actually find anything in it
They'll fix the problem by hiring a metric buttload of data mining consultants.
Which commercial toy rockets do you refer to ? Delta IV, Ariane 5, Atlas V, Zenit or Proton ?
Do you want to compare these toys to spectacular successes of NASA-designed NASP, X-33, X-34, X-38, 2GRLV , Shuttle-II ?
Well, all you are saying is true, but this doesnt mean these devices wont have applications http://urbanaero.com/Frame-whatsnew.htm Perfect craft for med evac duties. It provides capabilities that regular helicopters just cant do. Short flight time is just one constraint that they'll accept for these mission profiles.
But it does. Im speaking about technical feasibility of an application. You need to hit a certain efficiency benchmark per surface area to make some applications ( of photovoltaics ) possible in the first place. For instance 24-hour stratospheric solar flight, i.e. solar-powered UAVs.
You really need to have a certain level of power output per surface area, because there are low bar limits on how little power you can use to fly reliably. These limits are set by other engineering hard limits like battery energy densities, frame construction material strength per weight and so on.
Economics enter the picture later, especially when talking about military applications.
And solar-powered UAVs in stratosphere with indefinite loiter time are sought by basically all applications currently performed by satellites ( surveillance, imaging, communications ).
This gives ample playing room for economics, as satellites are usually top of the line tech, with best efficiencies in every aspect, gold plated.
More efficient technology does not mean wider applications irrespective of cost.
In some cases it does, because some applications can only be enabled when power output per limited surface area is above certain critical treshhold. Solar planes, solar blimps, solar-charged portable electronic devices to lesser degree.
Efficiency DOES matter to enable lots of applications, especially when your sunlight-exposed real estate is at premium. For example, PHEVs and EVs getting their top-up charge from roof-mounted panels, solar panels on top of laptop cases and so on.
Most importantly it matters for applications like solar flight. Solar planes of course wouldnt use heavy GaAs silicon cells, but the best of the breed thin-film cells.
The Apollo engineers had a pretty accurate idea of what they were setting out to accomplish.
.
.
.
.
Yes, a limited political stunt, with almost no real effects to the humanity at large.
while Columbus stumbled across the New World despite sheer ignorance and wrongheadedness.
Yes, and opened up a whole new continent ( for western world anyway ) for trade and colonization, almost immediately bringing massive economic gains for the homeland, and enabling people to migrate to new lands later on and settle there..
So yes, diametrically opposite..
Apollo _could_ have had similar effects as Columbus voyage, but it was done by government-mandated socialist organization, which never intended to open up space for the rest of the people. Free enterprise never had a chance..
Theres a way to do it better, but it requires radical rethinking on how we do things in space..
http://www.nasawatch.com/archives/2009/06/why_the_moon_he.html
I've only done superficial checking, but it seems neither is about manned spaceflight.
Wrong on both counts.
And the employees of Armadillo Aerospace are volunteers
Wrong. ( would be right if you used past tense )
This just goes to show that "superficial checking" is dangerous, or "Do your homework" as my math teacher used to say.
What was their ROI again?
Musks and Carmack's ventures are profitable already, by their own accounts.
There are pioneers in every field. Investing in personal computing didnt occur to a lot of people either, a while back.
You did not get the memo?
People with significant amounts of money like John Carmack, Jeff Bezos, Elon Musk, Paul Allen have thought otherwise, and have invested in manned spaceflight.
By necessity; free enterprise has never produced a viable manned orbital space programme..
Have you looked into the matter of WHY ? Without giving away too much, when you research the matter, you'll run into interesting terms like obstructionism, turf protection, pork politics, ITAR, entrenched interests and common misconceptions, perpetuated by certain groups and so on.
Nevertheless, there are several companies currently on track to start operating manned spaceflight vehicles, and when commercially successful with orbital versions thereof later. SpaceX is shooting for manned orbital from the get-go, with or without government subsidies.
and really struggles with unmanned ones.
Huh ?? Do you have any idea about the volume of the global commercial launch market, every year ? It isnt a "programme", as you put it. It a transportation market like any other. Currently with military lineage going back to ICBMs, but commercial market nevertheless.
What do you mean by "really struggles" ?
SpaceX has designed Falcon 9 for manned flight from the outset, and both Atlas and Delta have been considered as manned launchers in various stages ( OSP program ). With slight upgrades, a launch escape system and a reasonably small payload/capsule, they will be even safer.
They are certainly safer than current Shuttle track record ( 1 in 69 loss of crew ). Hey, Redstone and Atlas were considered safe enough at some point in time, with little to no track record, EELVs have quite a bit of successful launch history behind them.
Anything currently flying, with demonstrated success rate is safer bet than another dreamed-up rocket on paper, with all the unknowns of it, no ?
Seriously, NASA (and most space programs in general) should have one crucial long term goal: Getting us off this ball of rock and inhabiting other ones
NASA is a government agency ( an arthritic one ), government agencies don't colonize. Especially when international law explicitly forbids that.
What most people miss in 2001: Space Odyssey, are the logos on the space plane and Space Station V itself, where dr. Heywood flies to . They read "Pan American" and "Hilton Hotels" accordingly, NOT NASA, RSA or any other *SA.
Ironically, when time called for beating the communists to the moon, the great U.S. of A. did not tap into free enterprise, but created a huge socialist government-run space business, which 40 years later still thinks it should be running a space trucking line.
Um, why would a bearded GNU freak ever work on Linux ? Its not idealogically pure at all. They'd sit on Hurd/Debian
Problem is, that the lines between Laptop->Netbook->Tablet->Mid->PocketPC->SmartPhone are blurring.
Where do you draw the line ?
There are a bunch of ARM-powered MIDs, netbooks and tablets etc coming out in short order, and they probably will gain a pretty big market, considering the battery life and price...
Well done, but you left out "astronomical costs"
Counterpoint all you want, but look at how Japanese, Chinese and French auto- and battery makers are flocking to Bolivia to get a hold of their lithium salt fields.
( google news, bolivia, lithium )
The thing is, while some resources may be abundant here or there ( like desert area in some parts of the world, or lithium fields in another ), nations and corporations would still be very glad to open up supplies of these resources that are not dependent on foreign governments, not controlled by anyone else and so on.
In fact, Japan is in fight with China over rare earth metals right now for their industrial needs, and rare earth metals are not that rare actually.
Read up on the current fight between Japan and China for rare earth metals, also the rush for Bolivian lithium salt fields. Or look up on who is controlling the supply of most of platinum group metals.
There are things called "strategic resources", and great economic powers sometime desire independent access to these, even at great cost.
Chinese get that by the way, and securing access to new resources off earth is one of their main stated goals of space program.
They are looking at the moon as a new continent. Some others are as well, http://www.8cproject.com/
Dude, you are not testing on any portable/mobile/embedded browser at all ? Like Sony PSP or Nintendo Wii, Nokia n800, Opera Mobile or Fennec ? You have it easy ... Because on PC i can likely switch a browser if i have issues , but on an embedded-ish / portable device i cant, and thats where most websites fail.