Some of it may be, eventually, but at first, they'll be too busy building and expanding the colony to automate everything. And, I doubt that automated equipment like that is going to be a high priority import from Earth for a very long time. Of course, I could be wildly wrong here, but that's how I see it, especially if they're planning on using their experience by building a colony on Mars, where rapid resupply isn't practical.
Because we already know how to build a colony in Antarctica, even though it's not self-sufficient. Building a moon colony that doesn't need regular supplies from the Earth would be a major step forward for us. And, a colony like that wouldn't be full of unemployed people watching Netflix because most of them would be busy growing food, doing maintenance and all of those other things that are needed to keep the colony livable.
OK, then I'll rephrase the part of my question that you didn't like. Learning how to build a self sustaining colony on the Moon will teach us what we'll need to know to build them on other planets, moons and asteroids so that we can expand across the Solar System without having to depend on resupply from Earth. Also, we can use any local minerals we can find to help build those colonies without having to lift everything out of Earth's gravity well. This will help our species survive any catastrophes on Earth. And, in the long term, we'll find reasons to be there that we can't even imagine as yet, just as the early students of electricity couldn't even conceive of most of the things we use it for today.
...is there really *any* reason to settle on the Moon besides enabling us to go further into the Solar System?
Isn't that enough of a reason? And, if we can learn how to build a self-sustaining colony on the Moon, it will be much easier to build one on Mars. Not only will we know what to do, we won't have to do all of the exterior work in hard vacuum.
And for that matter, in a perfect world, the testers wouldn't be told how the devs expected the software to be used. Instead, they'd be expected to mess around with it, use it in unexpected ways (not that typing too fast should be unexpected) and try to make it fail.
If there are that many people who still want to play those games on line, EA should reactivate their own servers, let them play the game and charge a fair price for the service. Almost pure profit, as they should already have all of the infrastructure including the software.
If I had to guess, it's a failure in testing, and one that I've seen more than once. The testers only test to see if it works right when used the way the designers expect it to use but never check to see what happens if the users hit a wrong key, type too fast or otherwise enter unexpected data. The reason for this is, "In a perfect world, people wouldn't do things like this." And, if you point out that this isn't a perfect world, you're lucky if all you get is a dirty look.
You are aware, aren't you, that Mr. Pai was first appointed to that position by President Obama in 2011, and approved unanimously by the Senate in 2012. If you hate him so much, why didn't you complain then?
No, I mean that if we had the type of democracy you think we have, the last presidential election would have been decided by two states: California and New York. I suppose you would have preferred that, but that's not how things work in the US. Also, please note that although the House of Representatives gives the various states votes in proportion to their population, the Senate gives each the same number, to balance things out and keep the big states from forcing their will on the little ones.
In case you missed this in school, one of the reasons the US government is set up the way it is is to prevent the tyranny of the majority, and protect the rights of the minority.
Just about everybody, including diabetics benefits from walking. My point was that counting steps, as in a pedometer is a good way to tell if you're getting enough exercise, but for many people who don't or can't get as much exercise as they need, the constant calorie count can look like a way to shame them into walking more, and that's counterproductive.
yes, but you're unlikely to manage your weight issues just by exercise. You *have* to eat less as well.
Or, in my case, eat more calories without eating more carbs, because I'm Type 1.5 and I've been underweight for years. I was thrilled to learn that NovaLog causes weight gain, but all I gained was four pounds, less than half of what I was hoping for.
There are many Type II diabetics out there who are controlling their blood sugar with drugs that have the unfortunate side effect of increasing their appetite. This makes it very difficult for them to avoid weight gain. I'd think that having an app that counts how many calories you're burning, especially one that you can't turn off, would be very unpleasant for them because of the implication that they could get rid of that extra weight "if they only tried harder."
Back when I was in high school, I worked in retail for my father. This was in the '60s, long before there were registers that told you how much change to give, so I had to learn how to do it myself. The way he taught me was, first use pennies to get to the nearest nickel, then nickels and dimes to get to the next quarter and from there to the next dollar, with obvious substitutions if you ran out of one kind of coin. (Pennies, of course, being the hardest to work around.) Once you're there, you use the same technique with singles, fives, tens and so on. It's not exactly rocket surgery, folks, it's just that most people never need to learn it and aren't good enough at mental arithmetic to work it out.
I don't know what branch you were in, but I'd bet money you weren't in the Army. Why? Well, I've noticed many times that Army vets talk about being in the Army, but vets from any other branch talk about being in the military. I've no idea why, but that's how it seems to work. And that's the way I say it, and I was in Uncle Sam's Navy back in 'Nam.
So what you're saying is, electroweak is useful for something more than just helping to prove a theory. Thank you; I hadn't known that and was wondering.
Well, I do understand that the weak interaction is responsible for beta decay, and that detecting the unified electroweak force acted as confirmation of the theory that predicted it, but I already knew that. Nothing that I found in the article even hinted at what may well be the most important thing about it.
That's fine, if you already know that. However, most laymen don't, and unless the article mentions it, much of the significance of the theory is lost on them.
I took a look at the article on the Electroweak Interaction. As a layman, I could more-or-less follow the overview, but I didn't even try to follow the math, because I know it's too deep for me. There was one thing missing that would have made it a much more satisfactory experience for me: a brief explanation of just what the significance of this is, and why physicists find it important. And, that's not uncommon in technical articles; the people writing them tend to forget that laymen who don't already understand the subject are coming to Wikipedia to get a better idea of what it's all about, in words they can understand.
If you work a normal five day week, you stay up late Friday because you don't have to get up for work on Saturday. Saturday night you stay up even later, probably partying. Sunday, you get up very late and aren't ready for bed until late at night. Then, you have to get up Monday morning at your regular time and go to work even though you didn't get nearly enough sleep the night before. Of course you feel bad on Monday; what else would you expect?
Slashdot Mirror
Some of it may be, eventually, but at first, they'll be too busy building and expanding the colony to automate everything. And, I doubt that automated equipment like that is going to be a high priority import from Earth for a very long time. Of course, I could be wildly wrong here, but that's how I see it, especially if they're planning on using their experience by building a colony on Mars, where rapid resupply isn't practical.
Because we already know how to build a colony in Antarctica, even though it's not self-sufficient. Building a moon colony that doesn't need regular supplies from the Earth would be a major step forward for us. And, a colony like that wouldn't be full of unemployed people watching Netflix because most of them would be busy growing food, doing maintenance and all of those other things that are needed to keep the colony livable.
OK, then I'll rephrase the part of my question that you didn't like. Learning how to build a self sustaining colony on the Moon will teach us what we'll need to know to build them on other planets, moons and asteroids so that we can expand across the Solar System without having to depend on resupply from Earth. Also, we can use any local minerals we can find to help build those colonies without having to lift everything out of Earth's gravity well. This will help our species survive any catastrophes on Earth. And, in the long term, we'll find reasons to be there that we can't even imagine as yet, just as the early students of electricity couldn't even conceive of most of the things we use it for today.
...is there really *any* reason to settle on the Moon besides enabling us to go further into the Solar System?
Isn't that enough of a reason? And, if we can learn how to build a self-sustaining colony on the Moon, it will be much easier to build one on Mars. Not only will we know what to do, we won't have to do all of the exterior work in hard vacuum.
And for that matter, in a perfect world, the testers wouldn't be told how the devs expected the software to be used. Instead, they'd be expected to mess around with it, use it in unexpected ways (not that typing too fast should be unexpected) and try to make it fail.
If there are that many people who still want to play those games on line, EA should reactivate their own servers, let them play the game and charge a fair price for the service. Almost pure profit, as they should already have all of the infrastructure including the software.
So what went wrong here?
If I had to guess, it's a failure in testing, and one that I've seen more than once. The testers only test to see if it works right when used the way the designers expect it to use but never check to see what happens if the users hit a wrong key, type too fast or otherwise enter unexpected data. The reason for this is, "In a perfect world, people wouldn't do things like this." And, if you point out that this isn't a perfect world, you're lucky if all you get is a dirty look.
I thought it was Republicans who loved big business. When did this change?
So why did all of the Democrats vote for him in 2012?
Even so, the Senate voted unanimously to approve his appointment. If he's so horrible, why wasn't there opposition back then?
You are aware, aren't you, that Mr. Pai was first appointed to that position by President Obama in 2011, and approved unanimously by the Senate in 2012. If you hate him so much, why didn't you complain then?
"No," shout the Vogons, "Resistance is USELESS!"
No, I mean that if we had the type of democracy you think we have, the last presidential election would have been decided by two states: California and New York. I suppose you would have preferred that, but that's not how things work in the US. Also, please note that although the House of Representatives gives the various states votes in proportion to their population, the Senate gives each the same number, to balance things out and keep the big states from forcing their will on the little ones.
In case you missed this in school, one of the reasons the US government is set up the way it is is to prevent the tyranny of the majority, and protect the rights of the minority.
Why must everybody bow to the tyranny of the majority? Just make it opt in, and I've no objection.
Just about everybody, including diabetics benefits from walking. My point was that counting steps, as in a pedometer is a good way to tell if you're getting enough exercise, but for many people who don't or can't get as much exercise as they need, the constant calorie count can look like a way to shame them into walking more, and that's counterproductive.
yes, but you're unlikely to manage your weight issues just by exercise. You *have* to eat less as well.
Or, in my case, eat more calories without eating more carbs, because I'm Type 1.5 and I've been underweight for years. I was thrilled to learn that NovaLog causes weight gain, but all I gained was four pounds, less than half of what I was hoping for.
There are many Type II diabetics out there who are controlling their blood sugar with drugs that have the unfortunate side effect of increasing their appetite. This makes it very difficult for them to avoid weight gain. I'd think that having an app that counts how many calories you're burning, especially one that you can't turn off, would be very unpleasant for them because of the implication that they could get rid of that extra weight "if they only tried harder."
Back when I was in high school, I worked in retail for my father. This was in the '60s, long before there were registers that told you how much change to give, so I had to learn how to do it myself. The way he taught me was, first use pennies to get to the nearest nickel, then nickels and dimes to get to the next quarter and from there to the next dollar, with obvious substitutions if you ran out of one kind of coin. (Pennies, of course, being the hardest to work around.) Once you're there, you use the same technique with singles, fives, tens and so on. It's not exactly rocket surgery, folks, it's just that most people never need to learn it and aren't good enough at mental arithmetic to work it out.
I was in the military back in the 1990s.
I don't know what branch you were in, but I'd bet money you weren't in the Army. Why? Well, I've noticed many times that Army vets talk about being in the Army, but vets from any other branch talk about being in the military. I've no idea why, but that's how it seems to work. And that's the way I say it, and I was in Uncle Sam's Navy back in 'Nam.
So what you're saying is, electroweak is useful for something more than just helping to prove a theory. Thank you; I hadn't known that and was wondering.
Well, I do understand that the weak interaction is responsible for beta decay, and that detecting the unified electroweak force acted as confirmation of the theory that predicted it, but I already knew that. Nothing that I found in the article even hinted at what may well be the most important thing about it.
That's fine, if you already know that. However, most laymen don't, and unless the article mentions it, much of the significance of the theory is lost on them.
I took a look at the article on the Electroweak Interaction. As a layman, I could more-or-less follow the overview, but I didn't even try to follow the math, because I know it's too deep for me. There was one thing missing that would have made it a much more satisfactory experience for me: a brief explanation of just what the significance of this is, and why physicists find it important. And, that's not uncommon in technical articles; the people writing them tend to forget that laymen who don't already understand the subject are coming to Wikipedia to get a better idea of what it's all about, in words they can understand.
If you work a normal five day week, you stay up late Friday because you don't have to get up for work on Saturday. Saturday night you stay up even later, probably partying. Sunday, you get up very late and aren't ready for bed until late at night. Then, you have to get up Monday morning at your regular time and go to work even though you didn't get nearly enough sleep the night before. Of course you feel bad on Monday; what else would you expect?