Another poster says that the tapes are helican scan, which does make it a little more difficult... But even then, armed only with the original heads and an educated guess of what the results should look like, it should be doable with far less than 2,000 pounds of additional gear. We don't need a bunch of fancy, twiddly, analog feedback sections with failing discrete components to keep things in check anymore, as this is a job better suited to a fast microcontroller and some software. The demodulation of the signal, once things are scanning right, can be done completely in software after a simple preamp and A/D stage.
I agree 100% with this.
Don't try too much if the analog stuff is failing, just rebuild it with modern circuitry. Probably much cheaper and reliable.
Remember "Back to the Future"?? It's kind of like that. Replace huge discrete amplifiers with opamps. This is replacing boards the size of a book (or bigger) with the size of a thumb.
Or if this is really linear read, it probably can be rebuilt from scratch for, I dunno... $10k tops.
Of course, for the first experiments it's good to have the original reader, etc, for reference purposes.
Clearly in the context of processor efficiency. So now you're claiming that my use of java instead of jvm in the context of processor efficiency leads to a logical reply about poor java libraries?
Well, efficiency is a broad word.
I'm endlessly fascinated at the lengths people will go to avoid admitting any form of mistake or oversight.
Well, don't need to go further, it was my mistake and I'm sorry.
And the jvm is far more efficient than python. The stuff done with the jit is very impressive.
and you decided to laugh at me because java as a language has poor libraries. Really?
You didn't say JVM, you said Java.:) I'm sorry
Still, saying that the JVM is 'far more efficient' than Python is a little exaggeration.
Btw, there are many languages on the jvm. I happen to use jruby and would use that on GAE not java. I'm not a fan of java either, but the jvm is a great platform. This past week I wrote a threaded indexer in jruby using java's util.concurrent library. Try that with regular ruby and C then get back to me.
I couldn't agree more, and I believe that's THE reason Google picked Java, not for "Java" but for everything else on the JVM.
Yes, because it's so hard to use the 2 click, automated IDE function to generate all those getters and setters.
I don't depend on a smart IDE to write python code
You know, that thing that's one of the selling points of OO.
You write exactly as much code as you do in Python, autogenerate convenience methods (getters, setters, toString, etc.).
"Write exactly as much" NOT BY A LONG SHOT.(MyClass class1 = new MyClass() versus class1 = MyClass() just for a start) No need for getters and setters in python. Very rarely used, and you can do without (yes, you can write class1.x = 1 and that's calling a setter function)
How many awesome libraries are there in Java for things like IOC, data access, web frameworks (MVC and otherwise)?
Like Django? ORM and MVC for web. IOC? Try first-order functions.
Some of the best stuff in development was written in Java first (e.g. JUnit, Spring, etc.).
Agreed
Check out the networking portion of your favorite MMO game, it's likely written in Java, server side. Tons of banking software is written in Java once you get past the big iron portion. Tons of sites on the web are as well. Some of the biggest, custom forums in the world are Java (WOW forums are).
Well, so!? This site is Perl, twitter is Scala/Ruby, Pownce is (was) Django, etc, etc And yes, my bank uses Java, I know that.
Yeah, the GP was right, you are ignorant, and don't seem to know what you're speaking about.
Go learn about first-order functions and closures first.
And since 1.6, with annotations and generics, I'm not sure that the complaint about inflexibility is really there.
Suffice to say, I don't think that Python is the crystal clear choice.
I guess what matters in the end is developer knowledge of the language.:)
I would say one of the biggest advantages of GAE using Java is support for all the JVM languages (like JRuby, Groovy, etc, you could try running Jython as well, just for laughs)
I saw your original post, I don't disagree with you, even though the point is moot, efficiency in GAE has more to do with libraries and the code than anything else.
I don't dislike the JVM (ok, I dislike, but it's not the case here), I dislike the Java language
While your two links are interesting, I think you have to do more work to make your point. Can you cite why those links prove the superiority of Python? And what specifically do you mean by 'rewrite the bible'?
My beef is with the amount of code that has to be written, and the inflexibility of Java.
You just build a class on python, few includes, you're done. Not like Java. Also, no Expando in Java.
Regarding efficiency, I give you this
Interesting link, and yes, Java can be faster than CPython, but GAE probably doesn't use CPython...
And, AFAIK, it was "expected" from build imperfections in the spheres, and has nothing to do with gravity waves. Maybe there's something hidden there, but it's probably a very small signal not the huge (compared to the target) wobbling due to the process described there.
We don't have enough arable land on planet earth to fully convert from oil to biofuel.
BULLSHIT. You don't need arable land
You go at Algae and similar stuff.
Furthermore, it's a physical fuel that must be grown (on land, using fertilizers, pesticides and farm machinery), processed (expending energy) and then transported (expending energy).
Biofuel is only cheap because of gullible (or corrupt) politicians.
Yeah, because oil comes fully processes from the well and magically transports itself to gas stations.
No, biofuel is only expensive when people do the math wrong. My car runs on biofuel and it's much cheaper than gas, _no_subsidies_. Of course it's not people-starving, energy-inefficient corn ethanol.
Slashdot Mirror
I would think that the real problem is that Uranus jokes is driving research away from the 7th planet.
The effects of microwave radiation on high density airborne smug are still unknown
Another poster says that the tapes are helican scan, which does make it a little more difficult... But even then, armed only with the original heads and an educated guess of what the results should look like, it should be doable with far less than 2,000 pounds of additional gear. We don't need a bunch of fancy, twiddly, analog feedback sections with failing discrete components to keep things in check anymore, as this is a job better suited to a fast microcontroller and some software. The demodulation of the signal, once things are scanning right, can be done completely in software after a simple preamp and A/D stage.
I agree 100% with this.
Don't try too much if the analog stuff is failing, just rebuild it with modern circuitry. Probably much cheaper and reliable.
Remember "Back to the Future"?? It's kind of like that. Replace huge discrete amplifiers with opamps. This is replacing boards the size of a book (or bigger) with the size of a thumb.
Or if this is really linear read, it probably can be rebuilt from scratch for, I dunno... $10k tops.
Of course, for the first experiments it's good to have the original reader, etc, for reference purposes.
"When" can be "after we have warned everybody in the surrounding 300 miles incessantly for the past 6 months".
Just like the digital tv transition! Oh wait...
blowing up geological faults to 'ease the tension'. Better a small slip than a full-blown earthquake.
Or maybe if it's just for fun, give it to the Mythbusters.
Clearly in the context of processor efficiency. So now you're claiming that my use of java instead of jvm in the context of processor efficiency leads to a logical reply about poor java libraries?
Well, efficiency is a broad word.
I'm endlessly fascinated at the lengths people will go to avoid admitting any form of mistake or oversight.
Well, don't need to go further, it was my mistake and I'm sorry.
And the jvm is far more efficient than python. The stuff done with the jit is very impressive.
Yes, jit is impressive.
and you decided to laugh at me because java as a language has poor libraries. Really?
You didn't say JVM, you said Java. :) I'm sorry
Still, saying that the JVM is 'far more efficient' than Python is a little exaggeration.
Btw, there are many languages on the jvm. I happen to use jruby and would use that on GAE not java. I'm not a fan of java either, but the jvm is a great platform. This past week I wrote a threaded indexer in jruby using java's util.concurrent library. Try that with regular ruby and C then get back to me.
I couldn't agree more, and I believe that's THE reason Google picked Java, not for "Java" but for everything else on the JVM.
Yes, because it's so hard to use the 2 click, automated IDE function to generate all those getters and setters.
I don't depend on a smart IDE to write python code
You know, that thing that's one of the selling points of OO.
You write exactly as much code as you do in Python, autogenerate convenience methods (getters, setters, toString, etc.).
"Write exactly as much" NOT BY A LONG SHOT.(MyClass class1 = new MyClass() versus class1 = MyClass() just for a start) No need for getters and setters in python. Very rarely used, and you can do without (yes, you can write class1.x = 1 and that's calling a setter function)
How many awesome libraries are there in Java for things like IOC, data access, web frameworks (MVC and otherwise)?
Like Django? ORM and MVC for web. IOC? Try first-order functions.
Some of the best stuff in development was written in Java first (e.g. JUnit, Spring, etc.).
Agreed
Check out the networking portion of your favorite MMO game, it's likely written in Java, server side. Tons of banking software is written in Java once you get past the big iron portion. Tons of sites on the web are as well. Some of the biggest, custom forums in the world are Java (WOW forums are).
Well, so!? This site is Perl, twitter is Scala/Ruby, Pownce is (was) Django, etc, etc And yes, my bank uses Java, I know that.
Yeah, the GP was right, you are ignorant, and don't seem to know what you're speaking about.
Go learn about first-order functions and closures first.
And since 1.6, with annotations and generics, I'm not sure that the complaint about inflexibility is really there.
Suffice to say, I don't think that Python is the crystal clear choice.
I guess what matters in the end is developer knowledge of the language. :)
I would say one of the biggest advantages of GAE using Java is support for all the JVM languages (like JRuby, Groovy, etc, you could try running Jython as well, just for laughs)
I saw your original post, I don't disagree with you, even though the point is moot, efficiency in GAE has more to do with libraries and the code than anything else.
I don't dislike the JVM (ok, I dislike, but it's not the case here), I dislike the Java language
While your two links are interesting, I think you have to do more work to make your point. Can you cite why those links prove the superiority of Python? And what specifically do you mean by 'rewrite the bible'?
My beef is with the amount of code that has to be written, and the inflexibility of Java.
You just build a class on python, few includes, you're done. Not like Java. Also, no Expando in Java.
Regarding efficiency, I give you this
Interesting link, and yes, Java can be faster than CPython, but GAE probably doesn't use CPython...
java is extremely efficient
ahahahahaha
so I have no idea what you're talking about. It's far more efficient than python
AAHHAHAHAHAHA
I know it's fashionable to bash java on /., but you should at least know what you're talking about.
Let me just say that you don't need to rewrite the bible every time you want to do any operation on python (or pretty much any other language)
Compare this http://code.google.com/appengine/docs/java/datastore/dataclasses.html
with this: http://code.google.com/appengine/docs/python/datastore/entitiesandmodels.html
I wish Real Life had a 20% cap on taxes, that would be the best. Also, advisers that complained about what the public wanted.
But we can skip the giant monster from space thank you very much...
This is refering to SafeSearch and Orkut and whatever,
Probably carryon from other licenses, you see. Too bad the layers are not called on it.
Imagine a bewolf cluster of these.
And if you need more power, you just need to pick up more chicks.
No, no, the Bistromatic drive is much better...
Even though now it's been replaced with the CDS drive, so you can have ludicrous speeds without an actual propulsor...
this is the guy who invented Hungarian Notation.
Death usually isn't fun.
Unless it's manslaughter!
Tum tum tschi...
You know what's too bad? The anomalous effects in GPB have been explained, peer reviewed, etc, in the final report http://einstein.stanford.edu/content/final_report/GPB_Final_NASA_Report-020509-web.pdf
And, AFAIK, it was "expected" from build imperfections in the spheres, and has nothing to do with gravity waves. Maybe there's something hidden there, but it's probably a very small signal not the huge (compared to the target) wobbling due to the process described there.
So it's more like alchemy than science.
Yes, because hot fusion has been repeated over and over in experiments. Don't worry, it's only 20 years away...
Well, just keep in mind that if you don't get the Nobel, you can always try for the Ignobel!
We don't have enough arable land on planet earth to fully convert from oil to biofuel.
BULLSHIT. You don't need arable land
You go at Algae and similar stuff.
Furthermore, it's a physical fuel that must be grown (on land, using fertilizers, pesticides and farm machinery), processed (expending energy) and then transported (expending energy).
Biofuel is only cheap because of gullible (or corrupt) politicians.
Yeah, because oil comes fully processes from the well and magically transports itself to gas stations.
No, biofuel is only expensive when people do the math wrong. My car runs on biofuel and it's much cheaper than gas, _no_subsidies_. Of course it's not people-starving, energy-inefficient corn ethanol.
But it's got electrolytes...
No, but because Casmir dimensions are much bigger than the wrapped dimensions of string theory.
I'd say: "Programming is hard let's do Java"