I don't know. One would think that they went as durable as possible since the accuracy of the color reference is critical to getting accurate pictures. But the rovers were only supposed to last about 3 months. I think we're going on 5 years now, so who knows.
This is consistent with the picture. Depending on the filter they took the picture with, it might look VERY blue. They commonly represent the image obtained from the UV filter as "blue" when they want to produce a color image from the pancam, but have not used the true blue filter in the image set. Give the absorption spectrum, that would make it look bluer than usual because water absorbs UV even better than blue. Notice that the lowest point of that graph is just outside the visible range to the left of blue. That's UV.
This is true. Glass is also slightly green. Looks transparent when you look from the front, but look into a thick pane of glass from the edge and it's green. Just gotta stack enough of it up to notice. Nothing is perfectly transparent.
To be more precise, the CCD in the pancam is black and white, but there are a variety of filter they can place in front of it. When they do a "true" color image they use a red, green, and blue filter and take three exposures. However the pretty "true" color images rarely support the science they are doing, so they may, for instance, shoot a picture in infrared, visable green, and UV because that best suits the science they are doing. Sometimes they arbitrarily assign colors to these frequencies of light and make a false color picture. Other times they take a picture of a color reference target attached to the rover using the same filter set they took the picture with. Since the computers on Earth "know" what colors are on the reference chart they can produce a close approximation of the colors in the scene. They photographed the reference chart with ALL of the available filters in a variety of lighting conditions, so they have a pretty good idea that the colors are reasonably accurate. So it would be useful to know if this picture was color corrected or if it is a false color image.
You have to recycle the aluminum oxide back into aluminum. This is probably quite similar to the way you get teh aluminum out of the ore in the first place. This process is, however, rather expensive in terms of energy. So this is not really a way of generating energy as much as it is a way of transporting energy.
There are some really good up sides to this. You need electricity to seperate aluminum oxide into metallic aluminum. But you can generate electricty with nuclear, hydroelectric, solar, wind, etc. The list goes on. But you cannot easily put a nuclear reactor or enough solar panels or a workable wind generator or any sort of hydroelectric plant into a automobile. So it is useful for moving energry.
It is also useful because you can use "secondary use" aluminum as fuel. Crack the aluminum out of the ore. Make cans out of it. Use the cans. Recycle the cans and use them as fuel, reclaiming the energy put into the making of the can as fuel. This is where the "free" energy comes from. Reclaiming energy that was previously wasted. Not exactly "free", but certainly "unused" right now.
Why doesn't anybody implement a "hardware only" (or at least firmware only) hibernate? Screw the OS. If the BIOS can save the memory footprint somewhere and restore it and the exact state of the processor, how would the OS know anything had happened?
You need backward compatibility because people still use old apps. You need to eliminate backwards compatibility to get rid of bloat. Seems like the answer is to make the legacy features into optional packages that sys admins could choose to install or not install based upon their needs.
They then could balance security against functionality. They could also clearly see what they needed to ask developers to upgrade first. (If we upgrade APP X, we can uninstall LEGACY PACKAGE Y)...
In any Computer Science course, there are a handful of people who really know what they are doing. They do the majority of the work. They obtain the requirements, write the specs and finally implement the spec. The rest of the team really does not know what is going on and fakes it. Mostly they make a bunch of noise about how the project is not on time, not on spec, etc. They make noise about how they could have done it better.
Fortunately (unfortunately?) this is GREAT education because it prepares the students for the way the real world works.....
Re:Hate to say it by Comcast is partially correct
on
Comcast Lying About Vonage
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Aha! So Comcast does NOT put the internet and VoIP into two different frequency ranges. This does not happen on Brighthouse because they do put internet and VoIP into two different ranges. In essence two different cablemodems that are totally invisible to each other.
Not sure about Comcast, but Brighthouse uses a different frequency range on the cable line for Digital Phone than it does for Internet. The cable line is divided into a bunch of different "zones" by frequency range. Analog Cable, Digital Cable, Video on Demand, VoIP, and Internet are in different zones. VoD, VoIP, and Internet are all IP based services (in essence "cablemodems"), but each service uses a different space within the cable.
Since the field in an MRI can pick up one of those big oxygen bottles and fling it across the room, it's probably enough to render the data on the platter unreadable.
You don't use heavy water for power generation. You use uranium or plutonium. All nuclear power generation is fission. Uranium and Plutonium will fission. Heavy water will not fission. It will, however, fusion. There is no reactor that will fusion in a commercially viable way. There is ONLY ONE device that uses heavy water.... A hydrogen bomb.
I had the pleasure of setting up a couple of systems in an unheated office in Maryland, in Februrary. It was "only" 20 in the room, but the hard drives did not want to spin up until they warmed up. Aparently there is some sort of lubricant on the platters that turns to GLUE at 20 degrees.
So.... Put the servers outside the cold area. Make everything in the cold area diskless.
My father used to work for a company that made cockpit voice recorders. The bay the recorders get mounted in is unheated and unpressurized, so it gets 30 below and very low pressure. To compensate for that (and for condensation) they burried the entire circut board in a block of epoxy. If you run terminal server, you may be able to find a dedicated terminal server client that you can just bury in epoxy.
The hardest part will be the monitor. As far as I know LCD will freeze at that temp and just not work. CRT will potentially have condensation problems. I don't know enough about how plasma works to know what that will do.
Whenever I build a new PC or upgrade a PC, I ALWAYS test the machine before closing the case. 99% of the time it works fine, then I close the case and life is good. However if I close the case before testing it, 99% of the time something will be wrong that will require me to reopen the case. How does it know?
Percussive Maintenance
on
Computer Voodoo?
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
I had a friend have a hard drive that simply would not spin up. He REALLY needed the data off that drive. After about 6 hours of messing with it, he picked it up in frustration and slammed it against the desk. Well, it spun up. He didn't ask any questions, but IMMEDIATLY "Ghosted" the drive to another one. The drive lived through the "Ghost" and never started again. And the data was mostly OK.
It's not necessary to "blow up" a plane to "bring down" a plane. Anybody remember the ValuJet crash in the Everglades? That was "just" a fire. An improperly stored oxygen generator discharged. If you bring an oxidizer, there's plenty of "fuel" on board the plane. I'm not gonna name chemicals, but there's a number of options.
There's a variety of household items that are dangerous to mix together. I am avoiding going into more detail for obvious reasons.
(The terrorists probably already know what I'm talking about. I'm more worried about some brainless kid reading this and trying....)
Most ISP's are not clear WHERE you can expect their rated speed. RoadRunner really does deliver the rated 10Mbps, but ONLY to their own content on their own servers. I suspect the same is true for most ISP. The closer to "their" network you are, the faster things go. What varies from ISP to ISP is how much stuff is "near" their network and what value that stuff is. It's misleading, but not fraudulent.
Back to the "gas mileage" analogy, my Mustang actually can get 25Mpg on the highway as advertised, but it's no fun to actually do that. ISP's actually do deliver their advertised rate to at least some portion of the internet, but it might be "no fun" to actually go there.
Rates say "up to 3Mbps" (or whatever). People ignore the "up to" portion. ISP's encourgage them to ignore it. But they actually can get the speed somewhere, somewhen.
Internet traffic varyies wildy. I have a RoadRunner account 10Mbps down, 1Mbps up. The absolutely only place in the world I can actually get 10Mbps down is from RoadRunner's own servers. Their mail server runs LIGHTNING fast, even with huge attachments. Their news server, the same. I actually can regularly get 10Mbps binary downloads. Content from their webservers, the same. They even host servers for certain online games and it's like a LAN. If I run the bandwidth speed test from RR's server, it reports around 970Kbps most of the time, close enough to advertised to satisfy me. They even have a couple of HUGE files out there, 10MB and 50MB hosted as both HTTP and FTP, so I can clock the download of those files and remove any possibility that their bandwidth tester lies. I get download speeds of 2000 kbps or better.
But the minute I cross over to the internet, it's a different story. 3Mbps is the best I generally get. This is not due to RoadRunner being "evil" and overselling their capicity to the internet. Rather it is because the OTHER side, the site I am downloading from, either has the "per user" bandwidth capped (Microsoft, Yahoo, etc...) or simply does not have any more bandwidth than I am using. I can generally make MULTIPLE 3Mbps downloads, provided I go through different sites. But it is rare that I can get a single download to run faster. Occasionally Microsoft leaves a download uncapped, but rarely.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't know. One would think that they went as durable as possible since the accuracy of the color reference is critical to getting accurate pictures. But the rovers were only supposed to last about 3 months. I think we're going on 5 years now, so who knows.
This is consistent with the picture. Depending on the filter they took the picture with, it might look VERY blue. They commonly represent the image obtained from the UV filter as "blue" when they want to produce a color image from the pancam, but have not used the true blue filter in the image set. Give the absorption spectrum, that would make it look bluer than usual because water absorbs UV even better than blue. Notice that the lowest point of that graph is just outside the visible range to the left of blue. That's UV.
This is true. Glass is also slightly green. Looks transparent when you look from the front, but look into a thick pane of glass from the edge and it's green. Just gotta stack enough of it up to notice. Nothing is perfectly transparent.
To be more precise, the CCD in the pancam is black and white, but there are a variety of filter they can place in front of it. When they do a "true" color image they use a red, green, and blue filter and take three exposures. However the pretty "true" color images rarely support the science they are doing, so they may, for instance, shoot a picture in infrared, visable green, and UV because that best suits the science they are doing. Sometimes they arbitrarily assign colors to these frequencies of light and make a false color picture. Other times they take a picture of a color reference target attached to the rover using the same filter set they took the picture with. Since the computers on Earth "know" what colors are on the reference chart they can produce a close approximation of the colors in the scene. They photographed the reference chart with ALL of the available filters in a variety of lighting conditions, so they have a pretty good idea that the colors are reasonably accurate. So it would be useful to know if this picture was color corrected or if it is a false color image.
You have to recycle the aluminum oxide back into aluminum. This is probably quite similar to the way you get teh aluminum out of the ore in the first place. This process is, however, rather expensive in terms of energy. So this is not really a way of generating energy as much as it is a way of transporting energy.
There are some really good up sides to this. You need electricity to seperate aluminum oxide into metallic aluminum. But you can generate electricty with nuclear, hydroelectric, solar, wind, etc. The list goes on. But you cannot easily put a nuclear reactor or enough solar panels or a workable wind generator or any sort of hydroelectric plant into a automobile. So it is useful for moving energry.
It is also useful because you can use "secondary use" aluminum as fuel. Crack the aluminum out of the ore. Make cans out of it. Use the cans. Recycle the cans and use them as fuel, reclaiming the energy put into the making of the can as fuel. This is where the "free" energy comes from. Reclaiming energy that was previously wasted. Not exactly "free", but certainly "unused" right now.
So when I "distribute" it by playing it (or maybe even humming it) then I am is violation?
So am I violating the license by possessing an unlicensed copy of (read "have memorized") a song?
Windows NT 3.5 an 4.0 DID support a variety of hardware. You could run NT on X86, Alpha, MIPS, (wait for it), PPC. Then they bailed on it......
Why doesn't anybody implement a "hardware only" (or at least firmware only) hibernate? Screw the OS. If the BIOS can save the memory footprint somewhere and restore it and the exact state of the processor, how would the OS know anything had happened?
What risks? How is running 4 VM's on one big machine more risky than running 4 real machines?
Think of the positive ramifications for Hooters, KFC, etc....
You need backward compatibility because people still use old apps. You need to eliminate backwards compatibility to get rid of bloat. Seems like the answer is to make the legacy features into optional packages that sys admins could choose to install or not install based upon their needs. They then could balance security against functionality. They could also clearly see what they needed to ask developers to upgrade first. (If we upgrade APP X, we can uninstall LEGACY PACKAGE Y)...
Fortunately (unfortunately?) this is GREAT education because it prepares the students for the way the real world works.....
Aha! So Comcast does NOT put the internet and VoIP into two different frequency ranges. This does not happen on Brighthouse because they do put internet and VoIP into two different ranges. In essence two different cablemodems that are totally invisible to each other.
Not sure about Comcast, but Brighthouse uses a different frequency range on the cable line for Digital Phone than it does for Internet. The cable line is divided into a bunch of different "zones" by frequency range. Analog Cable, Digital Cable, Video on Demand, VoIP, and Internet are in different zones. VoD, VoIP, and Internet are all IP based services (in essence "cablemodems"), but each service uses a different space within the cable.
Since the field in an MRI can pick up one of those big oxygen bottles and fling it across the room, it's probably enough to render the data on the platter unreadable.
But you can't order A LOT of it...
You don't use heavy water for power generation. You use uranium or plutonium. All nuclear power generation is fission. Uranium and Plutonium will fission. Heavy water will not fission. It will, however, fusion. There is no reactor that will fusion in a commercially viable way. There is ONLY ONE device that uses heavy water.... A hydrogen bomb.
I had the pleasure of setting up a couple of systems in an unheated office in Maryland, in Februrary. It was "only" 20 in the room, but the hard drives did not want to spin up until they warmed up. Aparently there is some sort of lubricant on the platters that turns to GLUE at 20 degrees. So.... Put the servers outside the cold area. Make everything in the cold area diskless. My father used to work for a company that made cockpit voice recorders. The bay the recorders get mounted in is unheated and unpressurized, so it gets 30 below and very low pressure. To compensate for that (and for condensation) they burried the entire circut board in a block of epoxy. If you run terminal server, you may be able to find a dedicated terminal server client that you can just bury in epoxy. The hardest part will be the monitor. As far as I know LCD will freeze at that temp and just not work. CRT will potentially have condensation problems. I don't know enough about how plasma works to know what that will do.
Whenever I build a new PC or upgrade a PC, I ALWAYS test the machine before closing the case. 99% of the time it works fine, then I close the case and life is good. However if I close the case before testing it, 99% of the time something will be wrong that will require me to reopen the case. How does it know?
I had a friend have a hard drive that simply would not spin up. He REALLY needed the data off that drive. After about 6 hours of messing with it, he picked it up in frustration and slammed it against the desk. Well, it spun up. He didn't ask any questions, but IMMEDIATLY "Ghosted" the drive to another one. The drive lived through the "Ghost" and never started again. And the data was mostly OK.
It's not necessary to "blow up" a plane to "bring down" a plane. Anybody remember the ValuJet crash in the Everglades? That was "just" a fire. An improperly stored oxygen generator discharged. If you bring an oxidizer, there's plenty of "fuel" on board the plane. I'm not gonna name chemicals, but there's a number of options. There's a variety of household items that are dangerous to mix together. I am avoiding going into more detail for obvious reasons. (The terrorists probably already know what I'm talking about. I'm more worried about some brainless kid reading this and trying....)
Do you know how many times I have gone and BOUGHT the track that I am trying to learn how to play? Guitar Tabs SELL music....
Most ISP's are not clear WHERE you can expect their rated speed. RoadRunner really does deliver the rated 10Mbps, but ONLY to their own content on their own servers. I suspect the same is true for most ISP. The closer to "their" network you are, the faster things go. What varies from ISP to ISP is how much stuff is "near" their network and what value that stuff is. It's misleading, but not fraudulent.
Back to the "gas mileage" analogy, my Mustang actually can get 25Mpg on the highway as advertised, but it's no fun to actually do that. ISP's actually do deliver their advertised rate to at least some portion of the internet, but it might be "no fun" to actually go there.
Rates say "up to 3Mbps" (or whatever). People ignore the "up to" portion. ISP's encourgage them to ignore it. But they actually can get the speed somewhere, somewhen.
Internet traffic varyies wildy. I have a RoadRunner account 10Mbps down, 1Mbps up. The absolutely only place in the world I can actually get 10Mbps down is from RoadRunner's own servers. Their mail server runs LIGHTNING fast, even with huge attachments. Their news server, the same. I actually can regularly get 10Mbps binary downloads. Content from their webservers, the same. They even host servers for certain online games and it's like a LAN. If I run the bandwidth speed test from RR's server, it reports around 970Kbps most of the time, close enough to advertised to satisfy me. They even have a couple of HUGE files out there, 10MB and 50MB hosted as both HTTP and FTP, so I can clock the download of those files and remove any possibility that their bandwidth tester lies. I get download speeds of 2000 kbps or better.
But the minute I cross over to the internet, it's a different story. 3Mbps is the best I generally get. This is not due to RoadRunner being "evil" and overselling their capicity to the internet. Rather it is because the OTHER side, the site I am downloading from, either has the "per user" bandwidth capped (Microsoft, Yahoo, etc...) or simply does not have any more bandwidth than I am using. I can generally make MULTIPLE 3Mbps downloads, provided I go through different sites. But it is rare that I can get a single download to run faster. Occasionally Microsoft leaves a download uncapped, but rarely.