I don't know what to do about listening to your voicemails, but I know when leaving a message on most cell phone voicemails, you can just press 1 while the computer is droning on about 'leave a message at the tone or press 2 to enter a recursive menu with no hope of escape', even if it doesn't explicitly say you can press 1 to leave a message, and it will take you right to leaving a message.
Do you really think the PCs owned by soccer moms across the country have more important data on them than bank servers,.mil servers, or the bulk of non-fluff on the net?
I don't care about the data on them, but I do prefer to break into the soccer mom's computer, if I want to build a zombie spambot army. 'Importance', in the context of botnets, is in fact a function of the size of the installed base.
Same thing I thought. Of course, since this is being done by the good guys, there won't be any major flames directed towards them. If you honestly don't believe the RIAA can find who owned an IP address at a certain time, what makes you think these guys will do any better?
It doesn't take too much imagination to envision the mayhem with them carrying firearms and making decisions about shooting them.
It takes more imagination than you think, because there's nothing stopping them from carrying guns on campus right now (besides words on a paper, aka laws), and yet by and large they don't, today's tragedy notwithstanding. You're confusing giving someone who is responsible enough to get a Concealed Weapons Permit the permission to carry a weapon on campus with forcing every Joe college student to do so.
The claim of a conspiracy is the more extraordinary claim, and therefore the burden of extraordinary proof falls on you. Do you have any proof, other than a few anecdotes in one local news story, of a vast right-wing conspiracy?
To the contrary, it's something that can, and has been,tested on monkeys. The monkey in this article was hooked up to a robot arm and at first was synchronizing it's movements with her real arm, but after a while, learned to control the robot arm independently. This means we could theoretically upgrade ourselves with any peripheral we want, so long as the learning curve didn't kill us.
The program started in the late 1960s and has dominated NASA's manned operations since the mid-1970s.
While I don't disagree that driving the Soviets bankrupt with envy is a plausible political goal of the shuttle program, you won't win anyone over by blaming or praising (depending on your POV on the situation) Reagan for the whole thing.
It all comes down to biblical literalism. Someone who doesn't believe in evolution believes that because the bible says the world was created in 7 days flat. I personally think that people insist on biblical literalism because they desire some measure of absolute certainty, but you can form your own opinion.
Careful, somebody else might think of those African children like you think of the space program. There's enough wrong in America, why are we wasting resources helping people in other countries?
And besides, assuming we ever do get all the world's problem solved, what will people have to look forward to, if all we've done is make everybody equal, but without giving them anything to strive at with their newfound liberation?
It seems to me that most people deep down either don't care about manned flight or don't understand the resources necessary to keep the USA at the forefront of manned flight.
If you personally believe that robot science is more important than manned flight, just say so, but don't pay lip service to the idea of keeping the USA at the head of the pack in manned flight and then demand that NASA divert resources from creating the next generation of manned flight into robotic exploration.
The fact is, manned flight has stagnated since Apollo. Nobody can deny this. If manned flight means *ANYTHING* to you, it has to be expanded beyond LEO. This will take a lot of money. NASA is barely getting a cost of living increase, and the extra money to develop the next generation of manned flight has to come from somewhere. If we constantly put expanding our manned flight program on the back burner so we can adequately fund all the robotic exploration we want to do, the next generation of manned vehicles will look disturbingly similar to the current generation, and by that I mean people will die on a poorly designed spaceship that doesn't do anything it was envisioned to do. Again.
In conclusion, if you believe in manned flight and robotic exploration at the same time, NASA must have a funding increase. If you believe in manned flight by NASA at all, but don't want to give NASA a budget increase, manned flight must take the priority for the next few years. If you don't believe NASA should be doing manned flight, at least you're honest, even though I disagree with you.
Yeah, all NASA's/JPL's/etc.'s press conferences seem to be way overhyped like that. There's always something on SpaceRef or one of the other sites about some press conference that will reveal major findings, then when it comes around, it's like, meteor fragments on the moon or something else that we could probably have guessed.
Say what you will about Bush, he deserves a lot of it (and I even voted for him), but emphasizing manned space exploration will pay off big-time for general space science in the long run.
If we can get launch costs down (the best way to do that short of a miracle breakthrough is frequent launches) and a *productive* human outpost that is capable of 'living off the land', we'll get amazing robots assembled in space that don't have these severe mass limitations we get down here. If you can assemble your rocket engine from lunar materials, of course you can build a whiz-bang robot explorer.
So the governments would have to institute population controls on Earth, but people would be free to have as many children as they want off-world. This solution both prevents further overpopulation on Earth and incentivizes colonization of space. There would be die-hard keep the children on Earth-ers, unfortunately, which would possibly require a dictator-style government on Earth, but hey, that's just more incentive to get off-world.
If Telus isn't lying about the union posting pictures of employees crossing picket lines and posting confidential information on the site, they just threw away a powerful bargaining chip. If the union site threatened anyone or broke secret info, they should have brought legal action against the union, and even thrown somebody in jail if they could. That would have gotten some concessions out of the union. Now, however, they're the ones getting into legal hot water.
Yeah, I've had something like that happen. A friend of mine committed suicide 6 years ago, and my dad blamed Marilyn Manson for it. It was a needed laugh, because my friend didn't even like Marilyn Manson.
Earlier today on Spaceflightnow (the quote seems to be gone in the current version of the story), the project leader was quoted as saying something like "there is a significant chance of failure".
Similarly, the leader of the ill-fated Beagle 2 Mars lander publicly stated that he estimated the chances of success at about 50-50.
I think we could all waste a lot less time if we just ignored missions whose own leaders inspire that much confidence. In space, you have zero tolerance for error, so what may seem like a fairly small probability of failure to a dreamer, in all likelihood means certain doom.
I hate being this negative, but people think they can launch just any old septic tank into orbit and get back all this wonderful confirmation of their ideas. No lie, as soon as I read the quote from the leader of this solar sail mission, I gave up, before it was even launched.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't know what to do about listening to your voicemails, but I know when leaving a message on most cell phone voicemails, you can just press 1 while the computer is droning on about 'leave a message at the tone or press 2 to enter a recursive menu with no hope of escape', even if it doesn't explicitly say you can press 1 to leave a message, and it will take you right to leaving a message.
I don't care about the data on them, but I do prefer to break into the soccer mom's computer, if I want to build a zombie spambot army. 'Importance', in the context of botnets, is in fact a function of the size of the installed base.
Same thing I thought. Of course, since this is being done by the good guys, there won't be any major flames directed towards them. If you honestly don't believe the RIAA can find who owned an IP address at a certain time, what makes you think these guys will do any better?
It takes more imagination than you think, because there's nothing stopping them from carrying guns on campus right now (besides words on a paper, aka laws), and yet by and large they don't, today's tragedy notwithstanding. You're confusing giving someone who is responsible enough to get a Concealed Weapons Permit the permission to carry a weapon on campus with forcing every Joe college student to do so.
No, it's the official hexannual "Solar Power Breakthrough" that is never heard from again.
If you change the default slashdottit link from http://slashdot.org/slashdottit.shtml?vote=1 to http://slashdot.org/slashdottit.shtml?vote=aprilfo ols, you get to vote on the OMGPONIES! layout or a Flying Spaghetti Monster layout. I guess they'll switch over to the chosen layout in the morning.
The claim of a conspiracy is the more extraordinary claim, and therefore the burden of extraordinary proof falls on you. Do you have any proof, other than a few anecdotes in one local news story, of a vast right-wing conspiracy?
it sounds like a no brainer to me but the people who hold the purse strings are rarely predictable when it comes to spending money.
There's way more than money at stake here. Maybe Hubble is worth the risk to the astronaut's lives, but you can't just ignore that issue.
To the contrary, it's something that can, and has been,tested on monkeys. The monkey in this article was hooked up to a robot arm and at first was synchronizing it's movements with her real arm, but after a while, learned to control the robot arm independently. This means we could theoretically upgrade ourselves with any peripheral we want, so long as the learning curve didn't kill us.
The shuttle was part of Reagan's gambit to goad the Soviets into bankrupting themselves trying to keep up with our military spending in the 80s.
From Wikipedia:
The program started in the late 1960s and has dominated NASA's manned operations since the mid-1970s.
While I don't disagree that driving the Soviets bankrupt with envy is a plausible political goal of the shuttle program, you won't win anyone over by blaming or praising (depending on your POV on the situation) Reagan for the whole thing.
It all comes down to biblical literalism. Someone who doesn't believe in evolution believes that because the bible says the world was created in 7 days flat. I personally think that people insist on biblical literalism because they desire some measure of absolute certainty, but you can form your own opinion.
And besides, assuming we ever do get all the world's problem solved, what will people have to look forward to, if all we've done is make everybody equal, but without giving them anything to strive at with their newfound liberation?
It seems to me that most people deep down either don't care about manned flight or don't understand the resources necessary to keep the USA at the forefront of manned flight. If you personally believe that robot science is more important than manned flight, just say so, but don't pay lip service to the idea of keeping the USA at the head of the pack in manned flight and then demand that NASA divert resources from creating the next generation of manned flight into robotic exploration. The fact is, manned flight has stagnated since Apollo. Nobody can deny this. If manned flight means *ANYTHING* to you, it has to be expanded beyond LEO. This will take a lot of money. NASA is barely getting a cost of living increase, and the extra money to develop the next generation of manned flight has to come from somewhere. If we constantly put expanding our manned flight program on the back burner so we can adequately fund all the robotic exploration we want to do, the next generation of manned vehicles will look disturbingly similar to the current generation, and by that I mean people will die on a poorly designed spaceship that doesn't do anything it was envisioned to do. Again. In conclusion, if you believe in manned flight and robotic exploration at the same time, NASA must have a funding increase. If you believe in manned flight by NASA at all, but don't want to give NASA a budget increase, manned flight must take the priority for the next few years. If you don't believe NASA should be doing manned flight, at least you're honest, even though I disagree with you.
Yeah, all NASA's/JPL's/etc.'s press conferences seem to be way overhyped like that. There's always something on SpaceRef or one of the other sites about some press conference that will reveal major findings, then when it comes around, it's like, meteor fragments on the moon or something else that we could probably have guessed.
The wonderful DMCA has forced them to filter out results. For example This query displays a DMCA takedown notice at the bottom of the page.
That makes me want to reform our judicial system more than it makes me want to fork over money to the thug.
Or (+0, Sick but Funny)
Always smelled like aether/ether to me anyway.
Say what you will about Bush, he deserves a lot of it (and I even voted for him), but emphasizing manned space exploration will pay off big-time for general space science in the long run.
If we can get launch costs down (the best way to do that short of a miracle breakthrough is frequent launches) and a *productive* human outpost that is capable of 'living off the land', we'll get amazing robots assembled in space that don't have these severe mass limitations we get down here. If you can assemble your rocket engine from lunar materials, of course you can build a whiz-bang robot explorer.
So the governments would have to institute population controls on Earth, but people would be free to have as many children as they want off-world. This solution both prevents further overpopulation on Earth and incentivizes colonization of space. There would be die-hard keep the children on Earth-ers, unfortunately, which would possibly require a dictator-style government on Earth, but hey, that's just more incentive to get off-world.
Yeah, it's on today's APOD as well.
Now it's just a big black square where WTC used to be. Somebody must have complained about it.
If Telus isn't lying about the union posting pictures of employees crossing picket lines and posting confidential information on the site, they just threw away a powerful bargaining chip. If the union site threatened anyone or broke secret info, they should have brought legal action against the union, and even thrown somebody in jail if they could. That would have gotten some concessions out of the union. Now, however, they're the ones getting into legal hot water.
Yeah, I've had something like that happen. A friend of mine committed suicide 6 years ago, and my dad blamed Marilyn Manson for it. It was a needed laugh, because my friend didn't even like Marilyn Manson.
Earlier today on Spaceflightnow (the quote seems to be gone in the current version of the story), the project leader was quoted as saying something like "there is a significant chance of failure". Similarly, the leader of the ill-fated Beagle 2 Mars lander publicly stated that he estimated the chances of success at about 50-50. I think we could all waste a lot less time if we just ignored missions whose own leaders inspire that much confidence. In space, you have zero tolerance for error, so what may seem like a fairly small probability of failure to a dreamer, in all likelihood means certain doom. I hate being this negative, but people think they can launch just any old septic tank into orbit and get back all this wonderful confirmation of their ideas. No lie, as soon as I read the quote from the leader of this solar sail mission, I gave up, before it was even launched.