There's actually very little concrete information in the article, just some very general and often confusing statements, like:
The figure itself is stabilized by a trick developed years ago for stabilizing glass lasers eliminitaing any need for Pyrex at least for mirrors of this size.
The reason for using Pyrex is thermal stability (ordinary glass expands, changing the carefully-worked shape in the process). What's this trick then? How does it work? Being able to use plate glass effectively would make amateur telescope making much easier, yet I've never heard of this method. Some references would be nice.
Would you trust a computer review which said something like "this machine is cooled using a trick developed years ago for cooling nuclear reactors, eleminating the need for fans for a processor of this speed" without some kind of additional information? That's what this article sounds like to me.
These kind of statements and the lack of, say, an optical diagram, make it very hard to judge the article. Theres a photo of a guy with a telescope, so I guess he built it, but I'd prefer to see some more concrete information and proper test results (diffraction rings, spot diagrams, whatever).
The price list is strange - an encoder? There's no drive on that thing. A $4500 Schmidt camera? that has nothing to do with this telescope (its a kind of telescope in itself, used for very wide fields). 40" mirror grinder? 16" mirror? The article talks about an 18" mirror telscope. The only thing I can think of is that this an attempt at a price comparison with other technology.
We do already have an organisation which has comptenet lawyers and could handle this - the EFF (Electronic Frontier Foundation), but until now they haven't been much interested in patents. Perhaps if we petitioned them and pledged funds for the specific task of fighting this kind of action they would take notice? Comments, anyone?
It's useful as a trnasition technology, exploiting the existing infrastructure and increasing use of hydrogen engines until a critical mass is reached where it becomes economically viable to create a dedicated hydrogen distribution system. And because they use catalysts the energy cost should be small. Very clever indeed.
What releases energy in chemical combustion is making new chemical bonds which are lower energy (i.e. stronger) than the ones you have to break to start the reaction. In hydrocarbon burning you break the C-H bonds and form much stronger H-O and C=O bonds, releasing energy. So yes, the C does contribute energy, its just that the byproduct is CO2, a greenhouse gas.
I can't read the university or manufacturer pages at the moment (slashdotted), only the guardian article. But I would expect that only the test baloon over York will be tethered, and that will be at a fairly low altitude (York doesn't have a major airport). The stratospheric baloons will almost certainly not be tethered, because of the weight of 12 miles of cable strong enough to hold them and itself. More likely they will use engines (solar powered electric, for example, so as not to carry fuel) to hold position.
and next version with the xrandr extension (i think), will have a control panel for it
And this is precisely the point: its only the next version, with an extension, which will have a feature which has been on Windows for 8 years , on Macs for 10, and which users are used to. And resolution is just one of many little things like that.
Now I use Linux at home and at work, practically all of the time, and to me changing resultion or reconfiguring X is a few seconds in vi or on the command line. Clicky panels make no difference. But to an ordinary Windows user a move to Linux often means that they are suddenly faced with (what seems to be) an unfriendly environment which doesn't (seem to) have the features they expect. Sure, it's all there somewhere, but first impressions count, and that's what puts many people off.
Linux desktop developers need to work on impressions just as much as Apple and MS do. They're getting much better at it with Gnome and KDE, but there's still a lot to be done.
This depends on which images. The famous Hubble image of the Orion nebula was colour corrected by Professor O'Dell of Rice University to match what he saw visually a long time ago through a veyr large telescope (possibly the Palomar 100-inch, but I can't remember), back in the days when you could still look through large telescopes. (In order to see colour you need a lot of light, which means either a very bright object or a very large telescope.)
However, in general you are right, the colour corrections are arbitrary and don't match the "real" colours. Moreover, the brightness stretching and image processing often changes the colour in strange ways. There's a recent paper which discusses the problem and presents some solutions.
I've been looking the same problem, and I've found that a lot of the harsh noise can be damped by using the keyboard on a soft surface (such as a desk mat) or by sticking soft pads to the keyboard (keyboards often have small pads but they're often inadequate, and the brackets which change the angle are usually bare plastic).
The noise can also be reduced by changing your style to hit the keys more gently. It takes a little work but often works.
As for keyboard models, I seem to remember the old Mac keyboards which came with the LC series and other models of the time were pretty quiet. They had "soft" low profile keys much like a laptop, and took some getting used to after the Model M, but once you did they wree pretty good. I haven't found a PC equivalent though. Some Logitechs are pretty quiet too, but I can't remember the model numbers, just try them in the shop.
Actually, changing O2 or CO2 levels can have an effect. If the change is small, then life will usually work through feedback to repair it. However, the change can also destabilize the delicate balance of the ecosystem, causing it to flip into a completeley different state.
SimEarth used to do this. It was just a game of course, but the models were quite detailed and realistic as far as they went, and you could learn a lot from it about the way these variables interacted. It even had classic models like Lovelock's Daisyworld .
Re:Most useful in an existing Solaris environment
on
Solaris 9 x86 Review
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
I realise this is probably troll or flamebait, but since you're replying to my post, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. To reply:
except linux isnt free
Given that you can download Linux in the same way as Solaris or BSD,and in addition is GPL, in what way isn't it free?
is incoherent from distribution to distribution
Sure, there are differences, but no organisation using Linux for production work is going to use 5 different distros, they'll pick one and stick to it.
causes things tobe hard to port
Solaris shares many of the same libraries and Linux is largely POSIX compatible, in what way is is hard to port things?
breaks more often
Ok, this one is fairly subjective, so I'll leave it.
is poorly supported
(a) there a a large number of companies which support Linux (RedHat, SuSE, IBM, being the obvious ones), (b) there is a huge experience base among admins, larger now than with Solaris.
incorrecly implements NFS
I can only comment from a practical aspect: in 5 years of using NFS on Linux on mixed Linux/Sun/HP-UX networks, I haven't had any problems which couldn't be solved by correctly configuring the NFS mounts.
has poor automounter
Okay, this I'll grant, the automounter isn't very robust.
ive never seen it run right disklessly
Can't comment, haven't tried.
Engineers and IT infrastructure, thats a job for solaris. Period end. no room for linux.
Sure, many many engineers, scientists and so on use Solaris. Partly because it's good, partly because of history - they were using SunOS/Solaris before Linux was around (I've been using SunOS since version 4 on Sun 3's, and Linux since 0.99pl10). However, many many other engineers, and scientists use Linux - partly because it's also good, partly becuase it and the hardware are much cheaper, partly becuase they can easily get at the source and tweak and customize it. Both systems have their advantages and both are widely used. To say there is "no room for Linux" is just plain wrong.
Re:Anybody using Solaris x86 on the desktop?
on
Solaris 9 x86 Review
·
· Score: 1
As I mentioned above, a significant number of scientific institutions use Solaris workstations. Admittedly a lot of them have Windows or Linux laptops which are used for word-processing, but there might be some interest in Office apps. After all, there is OpenOffice.
Most useful in an existing Solaris environment
on
Solaris 9 x86 Review
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
I think the most relevant point made is that Solaris x86 would be most useful in and environment where the are already a large number of SPARC Solaris machines and the advantages (to both users and administrators) of a homogenous environment outweigh the hardware hassles. A lot of scientific and medical institutions are still largely Solaris-based, so for them it would be useful.
That said, Linux or BSD with olvwm or XFce can be made to look so much like Solaris that most users won't care, and the hardware compatibility won't be a problem. I guess it depends on what is more important in a given context, really.
So many people these days treat e-mails like a phone call rather than a letter. I've had mails from people who get upset that I didn't reply immediately (and then resend the mail 3 times with more exclamatin marks added each time); I've had mail at 11pm on a Sunday night expecting me to stand in for someone at 6am next day (without any prior notice of course - I ignored that one, out of work hours on both counts). One of my co-workers has even got into the habit of sending me mails which say nothing but "urgent problem!" expecting me to then call/talk/im him and solve his problem online - rather than stating the damn problem in the mail so that I could at least have a think about it first.
Its getting so bad that I'm now experiencing an email backlash: I just ignore most email for a few hours after receiving it (unless I'm expecting something important) in the hope of educating people who mail me that I won't necessarily read it immediately.
Add to this that there are already a lot of UNIX Sun workstations in hospitals, driving medical imaging scanners and the like, so that a lot of the infrastructure and contacts are already in place.
OTOH, the Apollo astronauts used Hasselblad cameras to take those priceless pictures on the moon. They were also issued special wristwatches. I don't remember who made them. Anybody?
Omega, the model was the Speedmaster.
I was out walking while on a camping trip in California some 15 years ago, with an original Sony Walkman (with a shoulder strap instead of a belt clip, and already themn missing its battery cover).
Anyway, on my way back it started to get dark, with the result that I reached the river which lay between me and the campsite somewhat upstream of the ford I'd used on the way out. Rather than look for the ford in the dark, I decided to wade across, forgetting the Walkman in my pocket.
Of course the water was deeper than I expected.
I remebered the Walkman only once I'd climbed out oh the other side. Took it out of my pocket, poured out the water, closed it, and turned it on, without even letting it dry (I was younger and more stupid then). And walked back to the campsite listening to the music.
I still have it, and it still works, along with a couple of newer models (also Sony).
I think (and perhaps the OP could correct me if I'm wrong) that the OP's slap comment 'slap' comment came from the fact that the girl replied that she didn't need to read the books because she would have the DVDs instead. In other words, that she had apparently been brought up to ignore the value of books. If that is the case, then even though she might enjoy the films and develop an interest in fantasy, she might never read the original stories (after all, she would already 'know' what happened) and thus miss out on one of the greatest works of literature. One might expect a child brought up with an interest in books to at least express some interest.
Having said all that, I didn't read LoTR until I was much older than 8, and I think 8 is not really
old enough to appreciate the language and beauty of that particular text. However, I did grow up surrounded by books and read voraciously.
As for the Hobbit, go New Line, go Jackson! I think I would be difficult to do it justice, particularly after the release of LoTR, but he is the only one who I can see doing it. I understand Christopher Tolkien's feelings, but I wish he would be a bit more open-minded.
Printing it out merely saves the information in another location, it doesn't change the citation. Citations are not for yourself, but for other people to see where you got the information from - a journal, private communication, or, in this case, a webpage. Once the webpage is gone they can, of course, come to you for the information, but can't check it for themselves - which is the point of citations in scientific articles.
As for point of citing webpages, often they contain information such as HOWTOs or work-in-progress which may be very useful but is not yet published - and, perhaps, never will be.
Slashdot Mirror
The figure itself is stabilized by a trick developed years ago for stabilizing glass lasers eliminitaing any need for Pyrex at least for mirrors of this size.
The reason for using Pyrex is thermal stability (ordinary glass expands, changing the carefully-worked shape in the process). What's this trick then? How does it work? Being able to use plate glass effectively would make amateur telescope making much easier, yet I've never heard of this method. Some references would be nice.
Would you trust a computer review which said something like "this machine is cooled using a trick developed years ago for cooling nuclear reactors, eleminating the need for fans for a processor of this speed" without some kind of additional information? That's what this article sounds like to me.
These kind of statements and the lack of, say, an optical diagram, make it very hard to judge the article. Theres a photo of a guy with a telescope, so I guess he built it, but I'd prefer to see some more concrete information and proper test results (diffraction rings, spot diagrams, whatever).
The price list is strange - an encoder? There's no drive on that thing. A $4500 Schmidt camera? that has nothing to do with this telescope (its a kind of telescope in itself, used for very wide fields). 40" mirror grinder? 16" mirror? The article talks about an 18" mirror telscope. The only thing I can think of is that this an attempt at a price comparison with other technology.
In short, interesting, but strange.
Very few people get that joke (that Ford Prefect was named after a car) - well done! Mod that up!
Neither did I, but the idea has been growing on me since I heard of it. Ford is about his zany character amd style than looks. This might just work ...
Disney did The Pirates of the Caribbean". If they do HHG with the same degree of style (and don't screw with it too much) it might be quite good.
We do already have an organisation which has comptenet lawyers and could handle this - the EFF (Electronic Frontier Foundation), but until now they haven't been much interested in patents. Perhaps if we petitioned them and pledged funds for the specific task of fighting this kind of action they would take notice? Comments, anyone?
It's useful as a trnasition technology, exploiting the existing infrastructure and increasing use of hydrogen engines until a critical mass is reached where it becomes economically viable to create a dedicated hydrogen distribution system. And because they use catalysts the energy cost should be small. Very clever indeed.
What releases energy in chemical combustion is making new chemical bonds which are lower energy (i.e. stronger) than the ones you have to break to start the reaction. In hydrocarbon burning you break the C-H bonds and form much stronger H-O and C=O bonds, releasing energy. So yes, the C does contribute energy, its just that the byproduct is CO2, a greenhouse gas.
I can't read the university or manufacturer pages at the moment (slashdotted), only the guardian article. But I would expect that only the test baloon over York will be tethered, and that will be at a fairly low altitude (York doesn't have a major airport). The stratospheric baloons will almost certainly not be tethered, because of the weight of 12 miles of cable strong enough to hold them and itself. More likely they will use engines (solar powered electric, for example, so as not to carry fuel) to hold position.
And this is precisely the point: its only the next version, with an extension, which will have a feature which has been on Windows for 8 years , on Macs for 10, and which users are used to. And resolution is just one of many little things like that.
Now I use Linux at home and at work, practically all of the time, and to me changing resultion or reconfiguring X is a few seconds in vi or on the command line. Clicky panels make no difference. But to an ordinary Windows user a move to Linux often means that they are suddenly faced with (what seems to be) an unfriendly environment which doesn't (seem to) have the features they expect. Sure, it's all there somewhere, but first impressions count, and that's what puts many people off.
Linux desktop developers need to work on impressions just as much as Apple and MS do. They're getting much better at it with Gnome and KDE, but there's still a lot to be done.
However, in general you are right, the colour corrections are arbitrary and don't match the "real" colours. Moreover, the brightness stretching and image processing often changes the colour in strange ways. There's a recent paper which discusses the problem and presents some solutions.
The noise can also be reduced by changing your style to hit the keys more gently. It takes a little work but often works.
As for keyboard models, I seem to remember the old Mac keyboards which came with the LC series and other models of the time were pretty quiet. They had "soft" low profile keys much like a laptop, and took some getting used to after the Model M, but once you did they wree pretty good. I haven't found a PC equivalent though. Some Logitechs are pretty quiet too, but I can't remember the model numbers, just try them in the shop.
Actually, changing O2 or CO2 levels can have an effect. If the change is small, then life will usually work through feedback to repair it. However, the change can also destabilize the delicate balance of the ecosystem, causing it to flip into a completeley different state.
SimEarth used to do this. It was just a game of course, but the models were quite detailed and realistic as far as they went, and you could learn a lot from it about the way these variables interacted. It even had classic models like Lovelock's Daisyworld .
except linux isnt free
Given that you can download Linux in the same way as Solaris or BSD,and in addition is GPL, in what way isn't it free?
is incoherent from distribution to distribution
Sure, there are differences, but no organisation using Linux for production work is going to use 5 different distros, they'll pick one and stick to it.
causes things tobe hard to port
Solaris shares many of the same libraries and Linux is largely POSIX compatible, in what way is is hard to port things?
breaks more often
Ok, this one is fairly subjective, so I'll leave it.
is poorly supported
(a) there a a large number of companies which support Linux (RedHat, SuSE, IBM, being the obvious ones), (b) there is a huge experience base among admins, larger now than with Solaris.
incorrecly implements NFS
I can only comment from a practical aspect: in 5 years of using NFS on Linux on mixed Linux/Sun/HP-UX networks, I haven't had any problems which couldn't be solved by correctly configuring the NFS mounts.
has poor automounter
Okay, this I'll grant, the automounter isn't very robust.
ive never seen it run right disklessly
Can't comment, haven't tried.
Engineers and IT infrastructure, thats a job for solaris. Period end. no room for linux.
Sure, many many engineers, scientists and so on use Solaris. Partly because it's good, partly because of history - they were using SunOS/Solaris before Linux was around (I've been using SunOS since version 4 on Sun 3's, and Linux since 0.99pl10). However, many many other engineers, and scientists use Linux - partly because it's also good, partly becuase it and the hardware are much cheaper, partly becuase they can easily get at the source and tweak and customize it. Both systems have their advantages and both are widely used. To say there is "no room for Linux" is just plain wrong.
As I mentioned above, a significant number of scientific institutions use Solaris workstations. Admittedly a lot of them have Windows or Linux laptops which are used for word-processing, but there might be some interest in Office apps. After all, there is OpenOffice.
That said, Linux or BSD with olvwm or XFce can be made to look so much like Solaris that most users won't care, and the hardware compatibility won't be a problem. I guess it depends on what is more important in a given context, really.
So many people these days treat e-mails like a phone call rather than a letter. I've had mails from people who get upset that I didn't reply immediately (and then resend the mail 3 times with more exclamatin marks added each time); I've had mail at 11pm on a Sunday night expecting me to stand in for someone at 6am next day (without any prior notice of course - I ignored that one, out of work hours on both counts). One of my co-workers has even got into the habit of sending me mails which say nothing but "urgent problem!" expecting me to then call/talk/im him and solve his problem online - rather than stating the damn problem in the mail so that I could at least have a think about it first.
Its getting so bad that I'm now experiencing an email backlash: I just ignore most email for a few hours after receiving it (unless I'm expecting something important) in the hope of educating people who mail me that I won't necessarily read it immediately.
Add to this that there are already a lot of UNIX Sun workstations in hospitals, driving medical imaging scanners and the like, so that a lot of the infrastructure and contacts are already in place.
OTOH, the Apollo astronauts used Hasselblad cameras to take those priceless pictures on the moon. They were also issued special wristwatches. I don't remember who made them. Anybody? Omega, the model was the Speedmaster.
Anyway, on my way back it started to get dark, with the result that I reached the river which lay between me and the campsite somewhat upstream of the ford I'd used on the way out. Rather than look for the ford in the dark, I decided to wade across, forgetting the Walkman in my pocket. Of course the water was deeper than I expected.
I remebered the Walkman only once I'd climbed out oh the other side. Took it out of my pocket, poured out the water, closed it, and turned it on, without even letting it dry (I was younger and more stupid then). And walked back to the campsite listening to the music.
I still have it, and it still works, along with a couple of newer models (also Sony).
Having said all that, I didn't read LoTR until I was much older than 8, and I think 8 is not really old enough to appreciate the language and beauty of that particular text. However, I did grow up surrounded by books and read voraciously.
As for the Hobbit, go New Line, go Jackson! I think I would be difficult to do it justice, particularly after the release of LoTR, but he is the only one who I can see doing it. I understand Christopher Tolkien's feelings, but I wish he would be a bit more open-minded.
As for point of citing webpages, often they contain information such as HOWTOs or work-in-progress which may be very useful but is not yet published - and, perhaps, never will be.
Apology, you meant the album "machine HEad" of course, not the modern band. Not enough blood sugar.
That was Deep Purple.
The only problem is the 10 day deadline. No university could find that kind of money that quickly, the funding/budget/beaurocratic cycles re too long.