How fast do you think you can spin that prop? Because with 0.6 of the earth's air density at the ground on mars, no matter how fast you spin it, you will not achieve any usable propulsion.
"Scientific hypothetical inquiry" does not dismiss physics. Childish daydreams of youth, maybe, but not science. You might just as well think outside the box about how many fairies can dance on the head of a pin.
When you take into account the number of people who intentionally run red lights, you will see the folly of your reasoning.
The overwhelmingly vast majority of people obey stop signs and red lights even in the middle of the desert where you can see no cross traffic for 20 miles.
I'm not sure anyone wants to live in a world so rigidly controlled by technology, or laws, that it is impossible to commit any minor transgression.
How do you get propulsion. You couldn't possibly swing a prop big enough to provide any propulsion in the thin martian atmosphere.
The highest atmospheric density on Mars is equal to the density found 35 km above the Earth's surface. The resulting mean atmospheric pressure at the ground is only 0.6% of that of the Earth.
A prop is not going to move you in this atmosphere. You couldn't swing a standard prop fast enough, and by the time you scale up the prop diameter, the plane would spin but the prop wouldn't, because a prop that big would weight way more than the plane and would have too much inertia.
Seriously, how many Y intersections are there in the civilized world which are not also provided with a merge lane on the tail of the Y? Wouldn't slowing to a reasonable speed make more sense?
Using one dangerous act to cover for another dangerous act qualifies your "buddy" as an idiot. Like Harry M. Whittington, you should choose your friends more carefully.
Google Glass is no more augmenting reality than a TV set is.
If it were rendering also the view behind it so there was no loss of vision, then it would be augmented reality. As it is it's the same as if you strapped your cell phone on an arm attached to your head a foot out or so.
But that is exactly what it does.
Its a HUD, projecting a mostly transparent overlay on what you see behind it. Further, it only covers one eye. So it could show navigation arrows without occluding your vision of the road.
Being Built into a wearable display device makes it a whole separate idea than simply a poor quality headphone.
Remember that patents don't mean that ANY prior use of a technology makes any other use obvious, and thus non-patentable. All you need to do is combine them in a new non-obvious way in an application not seen before.
Bone conduction isn't necessary for these glasses to do their job. They could use standard ear buds. It just makes it easier to put them on and take them off.
You might find prior art, but nothing posted above comes close.
These glasses never block your vision or require you to take your eyes off the road, so at least you will see things you are approaching. They also have a camera embedded so they could probably be programmed to know when you are driving, and limit the display of data to just navigation info.
It would teach red light runners that they can, and will, get away with running red lights, because cross traffic will be stopped. I can't imagine the number of rear-ends this would cause for those having a green light switching to Red with no warning. I'd rather see it raise a crash-rated bollard to the high speed red-light runner. If someone is going to get hurt, it should be the scoff-law, not the guy with the green light.
And how on Earth do you benefit from cheating in school? Aren't you there to learn or something?
Collaborative learning (study groups) are ok, and often encouraged, sometimes required. Why: Because they AID learning.
Since the test was a take-home exam, I could see where the students, in the absence of any instructions to the contrary might thing it was just another co-op assignment. (Not saying there wasn't any warning not to work in groups, just tossing that out there).
In any university testing environment the test answers are usually stored under lock and key. Even most essay style exams have bullet point lists (again secret) that have to be mentioned in passing in the composition in order to be score-able on anything scale other than a whim. So throwing this exam out there to "take home" seems pretty reckless, if not hopelessly naive on the part of the professor.
If you need 22 inches to read a 148 character tweet you might as well get a screen reader to read them aloud for you. Or better yet, buy some glasses.
Re:Safari and Firefox
on
Twitter #Hacked
·
· Score: 4, Funny
Who reads twitter with a web browser anymore?
Did osmosis and transmission into the brain by optical cable get perfected while I was offline in the last three weeks? Can you let us in on the secret...
Funny little thing happened while your were asleep Rip Van Winkle. Smartphones were found under a cabbage leaf and the world rejoiced.
Safari and Firefox
on
Twitter #Hacked
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Who reads twitter with a web browser anymore? All quarter million of these accounts? Or was that avenue used to gain access on a server to a password databases or what?
TFA says
hackers gained access to Twitter's internal systems and stole information, compromising 250,000 accounts
They then reference an advisory from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security that users disable Java on their computers.
Maybe Twitter should follow DHS?
This sounds like half the story. And press accounts aren't much more informative. Seems everyone is playing this java angle pretty close to the vest.
Sure, the iPhone 5 may have more processing power... But I bet if you put that thing in space, the first cosmic ray that comes along will happily crash the OS. Game over.
Hardware in spaecraft has to be hardened big time against radiation. Off the shelf junk will NOT work. Just sayin'.
That's the myth anyway.
Turns out both the Russian and US Space agencies are using off the shelf laptop computers in space with no special hardening. All failures todate have been screens, because of the laptops getting accidentally knocked and sent careening across the cabin to hit something.
Turns out the chances of a cosmic ray killing a processor are way less in space than they are here on slashdot. Also turns out that shielding is a lot harder to achieve than expected. Turns out Seymour Cray was wrong after all, and parity checking is not just for farmers. Most satellites and space based processors are no more successful at hardening than your garden variety laptops. They just program them better and watch for memory errors.
True, Pandora only has a small percentage of paying customers, so just about all the money they make is from ads. Spotify, allegedly, has a much higher percentage of paid users. They can download anything for $10/mo with a premium account.
I've not dug into her spreadsheets to see if she is taking into account those with subscriptions, or also adding in the itunes/amazon/google play purchases. I suspect if she was happy with those sales she wouldn't have posted it.
Hmmm, not buying the Churchill comparison. Winston was on the outside before the war, and was more or less guaranteed the election by Hitler's castration of Chamberlain. After the war, his pre-existing problems came back to haunt him. Read Winston's War.
Chu had no prior problems, and isn't being banished for accumulated past transgressions. His work is far from done. He doesn't have to stand for re-election. Only one vote counts, Obama's.
He's probably the person with the best science background in the whole administration.
He, like 4 or 5 other department heads is "choosing" to leave with his work half done. Why is that? Has he been pressured into staying just long enough to get Obama elected?
Its not unusual to lose a couple cabinet members upon a second term election, especially when those cabinet heads were more or less forced on you in your first term to garner support. Every administration has a couple of those. More so at the end of the second term than the beginning.
If this was a Republican administration the press would be wringing its hands at all these replacements. But Obama is too big to fail for the liberal press, so they will just push this rush to the exit back onto page 5.
You miss the whole point of the article. People DO want her music. Even if you don't.
After her songs had been played more than 1.5 million times on Pandora over six months, she earned $1,652.74. On Spotify, 131,000 plays last year netted just $547.71, or an average of 0.42 cent a play.
She's not complaining that she has too few listeners. Shes apparently content with the number of listeners.
Slashdot Mirror
How fast do you think you can spin that prop? Because with 0.6 of the earth's air density at the ground on mars, no matter how fast you spin it, you will not achieve any usable propulsion.
"Scientific hypothetical inquiry" does not dismiss physics. Childish daydreams of youth, maybe, but not science. You might just as well think outside the box about how many fairies can dance on the head of a pin.
You can't hand-waive away physics.
What exactly do you hope to gain by propping up this stupid article?
Very first tile in illustration: rip out engine, install batteries and electric motor.
RTFA
And get propulsion from a prop in an atmosphere of .6 that on earth?
Use your common sense son.
When you take into account the number of people who intentionally run red lights, you will see the folly of your reasoning.
The overwhelmingly vast majority of people obey stop signs and red lights even in the middle of the desert where you can
see no cross traffic for 20 miles.
I'm not sure anyone wants to live in a world so rigidly controlled by technology, or laws, that it is impossible to commit any minor transgression.
Lift?
How do you get propulsion. You couldn't possibly swing a prop big enough to provide any propulsion in the thin martian atmosphere.
The highest atmospheric density on Mars is equal to the density found 35 km above the Earth's surface. The resulting mean atmospheric pressure at the ground is only 0.6% of that of the Earth.
A prop is not going to move you in this atmosphere. You couldn't swing a standard prop fast enough, and by the time you scale up the prop diameter, the plane would spin but the prop wouldn't, because a prop that big would weight way more than the plane and would have too much inertia.
Its a silly thought exercise.
And how low a temperature will that work at?
The upshot is: Your plane would fly pretty well,
Let me know when you get that Cessna engine started on mars.
Seriously, how many Y intersections are there in the civilized world which are not also provided with a merge lane on the tail of the Y?
Wouldn't slowing to a reasonable speed make more sense?
Using one dangerous act to cover for another dangerous act qualifies your "buddy" as an idiot.
Like Harry M. Whittington, you should choose your friends more carefully.
Google Glass is no more augmenting reality than a TV set is.
If it were rendering also the view behind it so there was no loss of vision, then it would be augmented reality. As it is it's the same as if you strapped your cell phone on an arm attached to your head a foot out or so.
But that is exactly what it does.
Its a HUD, projecting a mostly transparent overlay on what you see behind it. Further, it only covers one eye. So it could show navigation arrows without occluding your vision of the road.
Meets my definition of augmented reality.
Being Built into a wearable display device makes it a whole separate idea than simply a poor quality headphone.
Remember that patents don't mean that ANY prior use of a technology makes any other use obvious, and thus non-patentable.
All you need to do is combine them in a new non-obvious way in an application not seen before.
Bone conduction isn't necessary for these glasses to do their job. They could use standard ear buds.
It just makes it easier to put them on and take them off.
You might find prior art, but nothing posted above comes close.
Who says its a stupid choice? Do you have a shred of evidence to say it might not enhance safety?
These glasses never block your vision or require you to take your eyes off the road, so at least you will see things you are approaching. They also have a camera embedded so they could probably be programmed to know when you are driving, and limit the display of data to just navigation info.
Google: Shut up and take my money!
Exactly. This would be crazy stupid.
It would teach red light runners that they can, and will, get away with running red lights, because cross traffic will be stopped. I can't imagine the number of rear-ends this would cause for those having a green light switching to Red with no warning. I'd rather see it raise a crash-rated bollard to the high speed red-light runner. If someone is going to get hurt, it should be the scoff-law, not the guy with the green light.
And how on Earth do you benefit from cheating in school? Aren't you there to learn or something?
Collaborative learning (study groups) are ok, and often encouraged, sometimes required. Why: Because they AID learning.
Since the test was a take-home exam, I could see where the students, in the absence of any instructions to the contrary might thing it was just another co-op assignment. (Not saying there wasn't any warning not to work in groups, just tossing that out there).
In any university testing environment the test answers are usually stored under lock and key. Even most essay style exams have bullet point lists (again secret) that have to be mentioned in passing in the composition in order to be score-able on anything scale other than a whim. So throwing this exam out there to "take home" seems pretty reckless, if not hopelessly naive on the part of the professor.
Maybe we should have some reward for people who rat on cheaters. All the students seem to know who the cheaters are, but nobody wants to be a rat.
Considering the number of students involved in cheating, it would be like ratting out your local thug gang.
Someone is bound to take revenge.
This whole tendency to suffer any injustice and never speak up will probably be the downfall of civilization.
Plus logic dictates that with this number of people it's not the first time it ever happened.
When you realize that the discovery was made because of:
similarities on a handful of take-home exams in his spring course Government 1310
you have to wonder if this professor was clueless, idealistic, or engaged in an "honesty" research project of some kind.
If you need 22 inches to read a 148 character tweet you might as well get a screen reader to read them aloud for you. Or better yet, buy some glasses.
Who reads twitter with a web browser anymore?
Did osmosis and transmission into the brain by optical cable get perfected while I was offline in the last three weeks? Can you let us in on the secret...
Funny little thing happened while your were asleep Rip Van Winkle. Smartphones were found under a cabbage leaf and the world rejoiced.
Who reads twitter with a web browser anymore? All quarter million of these accounts?
Or was that avenue used to gain access on a server to a password databases or what?
TFA says
hackers gained access to Twitter's internal systems and stole information, compromising 250,000 accounts
They then reference an advisory from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security that users disable Java on their computers.
Maybe Twitter should follow DHS?
This sounds like half the story. And press accounts aren't much more informative. Seems everyone is playing this java angle
pretty close to the vest.
Sure, the iPhone 5 may have more processing power... But I bet if you put that thing in space, the first cosmic ray that comes along will happily crash the OS. Game over.
Hardware in spaecraft has to be hardened big time against radiation. Off the shelf junk will NOT work. Just sayin'.
That's the myth anyway.
Turns out both the Russian and US Space agencies are using off the shelf laptop computers in space with no special hardening.
All failures todate have been screens, because of the laptops getting accidentally knocked and sent careening across the cabin
to hit something.
Turns out the chances of a cosmic ray killing a processor are way less in space than they are here on slashdot.
Also turns out that shielding is a lot harder to achieve than expected. Turns out Seymour Cray was wrong after all, and
parity checking is not just for farmers. Most satellites and space based processors are no more successful at
hardening than your garden variety laptops. They just program them better and watch for memory errors.
True, Pandora only has a small percentage of paying customers, so just about all the money they make is from ads.
Spotify, allegedly, has a much higher percentage of paid users. They can download anything for $10/mo with a premium account.
I've not dug into her spreadsheets to see if she is taking into account those with subscriptions, or also adding in the itunes/amazon/google play purchases.
I suspect if she was happy with those sales she wouldn't have posted it.
POINT FOUR TWO Cents. Less than half a penny.
Reading comprehension!
Hmmm, not buying the Churchill comparison. Winston was on the outside before the war, and was more or less guaranteed the election by Hitler's castration of Chamberlain. After the war, his pre-existing problems came back to haunt him. Read Winston's War.
Chu had no prior problems, and isn't being banished for accumulated past transgressions.
His work is far from done. He doesn't have to stand for re-election. Only one vote counts, Obama's.
He's probably the person with the best science background in the whole administration.
He, like 4 or 5 other department heads is "choosing" to leave with his work half done. Why is that?
Has he been pressured into staying just long enough to get Obama elected?
Its not unusual to lose a couple cabinet members upon a second term election, especially when those
cabinet heads were more or less forced on you in your first term to garner support. Every administration
has a couple of those. More so at the end of the second term than the beginning.
But 5 is pretty big number, and the cabinet is getting whiter and male-er.
If this was a Republican administration the press would be wringing its hands at all these replacements.
But Obama is too big to fail for the liberal press, so they will just push this rush to the exit back onto page 5.
Why does some random cellist deserve my money?
You miss the whole point of the article. People DO want her music. Even if you don't.
After her songs had been played more than 1.5 million times on Pandora over six months, she earned $1,652.74. On Spotify, 131,000 plays last year netted just $547.71, or an average of 0.42 cent a play.
She's not complaining that she has too few listeners. Shes apparently content with the number of listeners.
She's saying half a penny per play is ridiculous.