> Eventually there will be a strong desire to explore, but it's simply too expensive with our current level of technology.
The incredibly expensive costs have little to do with technology, and much to do with operations. When one designs a craft while intentionally trying to minimize operations costs, as has been done with SpaceShipOne and SpaceX's Falcon I and V, things get much cheaper. The defense companies which have been developing spacecraft thus far really haven't had any reason to minimize these sorts of costs, since it would just reduce the amount of money they received from the government.
> SpaceShipOne is not driven by seeking of a return in investment - SpaceShipOne will never deliver a return of investment, primarily because it's useless as anything but a joy ride.
There is a logical transition from a craft like SpaceShipOne to craft capable of transcontinental spaceflights (e.g. Tokyo-NY in 2 hours). I suspect there will be a profitable market for this, easily enough to recoup the costs of investment.
I have no doubt that Armadillo will keep on going, and even though it might take a while longer, eventually create a phenomenal product. If you have any doubts, just watch this video of a perfect test flight they recently had. In the video you can see the unmanned craft fly straight up, above the camera's view, and then land down in the same spot perfectly. It's simply amazing.
> Whitney Huston's national anthem was only valued at $3.18 (perhaps she should be as upset as anyone). (Or does the disk only contain that one piece? In which case, um, I'm not at all sure what to say - especially if I'm to steer clear of legal action.)
The album contains two songs (totalling 3 minutes and 49 seconds), not one. What a deal!
Thankfully Bigelow Aerospace is working on inflatable space habitats (using former TransHab technology). They'll start in-space tests next year, on the maiden flight of SpaceX's (ultra-cheap) Falcon V rocket. With any luck we'll have a privately funded ISS-equivalent in a few years anyways, for a fraction of the cost.
Really, I wonder if this one will allow users to install 3rd party software. With the current Sidekick programmers can develop and run their own software on an emulator, but aren't allowed to actually install it on the machines. People have implemented handy things like ssh clients, but unless you're an official Sidekick developer, you can't actually run it.
If they only allowed 3rd party software, I would have bought a Sidekick instead of shelling out the extra cash for a Treo 600.
With any luck, NASA will use this as an excuse to finally cut funding for the space shuttle and (temporarily) the space station. Seriously, these two programs have eaten up most of NASAs budget and have contributed essentially nil to either exploration or science (though I admit it was a nice way to improve foreign relations with Russia).
Hopefully they'd then use any excess funds to quickly develop a sane spaceflight system which doesn't try to transport crew and heavy cargo in the same ship, while helping the formation of a private space industry via Centennial Challenges prizes.
With any luck, NASA will use this as an excuse to finally cut funding for the space shuttle and (temporarily) the space station. Seriously, these two programs have eaten up most of NASAs budget and have contributed essentially nil to either exploration or science (though I admit it was a nice way to improve foreign relatioÈ
I wonder if Doom 3 will have any easter eggs referencing Armadillo Aerospace. It'd be quite amusing if one of United Aerospace Corporation craft happened to look an awful lot like the Black Armadillo.
> Most people do not like interacting with machines. Human interaction is what we have evolved to be optimized for. Our brain has special structures for face tracking/recognition that are far faster than similar generalized systems in the brain. Many people are uncomfortable with and intimidated by high technology, but would not be with friendly, humanlike robots.
You have to be careful about the Uncanny Valley, though, at least according to a particular Japanese roboticist. Apparently once you get within a certain closeness of anthropomorphism, small things which aren't "quite right" can really freak people out.
On the subject of getting us out of Low Earth Orbit again, one month ago NASA organized a workshop to brainstorm and refine ideas for cash prizes, as part of the Centennial Challenges Program. I was on their web site, and noticed that a Post-Workshop Report is now available. There's quite a bit of good information there regarding possible prizes.
Here's a list of possible prize goals which were examined in detail (from TOC): - Precision Lander - Astronaut Glove - Mobile Power Breakthrough - Micro Reentry Vehicle - Robot Triathlon - Lunar Processing Demo - Quantum Computer - Lunar Landing - Telerobotic Race - General Aviation - 3-Dimensional Detector - Autonomous Earth Analog Sample Return - Long-Duration Cryogenic Propellant Storage Tank - Perpetual (30-Day) UAV - Aircraft Engine - Deployable Telescopes - Aerocapture - Autonomous UAV Cargo Hauler - Human Radiation Shielding - Solar Sail Race - Rover Survivor - Planetary Surface Power Transmission - Extreme Environment Computer - Mars Com/Nav Micromission - Autonomous Drill - Nanotube Tether - In-Situ Life Detector - Asteroid Mission - Miniature Robotic Flyer - Human Space Flight - Orbiter Technology - Human Space Flight - Suborbital Flight - Human Space Flight - PVT APOLLO 8 - Education - Suborbital Flights for Scientific Payloads
I was thinking of passing out their flyer just for the heck of it (I'm a bit of a singularity fan), but they really need to make it more "shiny." If you want people to take a flyer from you, you need to have at least some sort of picture on it. A little more detail on the issues they examine might also be good.
And why doesn't it mention that they have an article by Greg Bear?!? (a fairly well-known sci-fi author)
Anybody feel like making some additions to their doc file and posting it here? I don't really have time myself at the moment...
I remember seeing a preview interview of the Playstation 3 a few years ago.
Sony: Dreamcast? Ha ha, funny stupid yankee! You dishonor me with your mention of this Dreamcast. The Praystation 3 does not connect to internet, Praystation 3 CONTAIN the internet. You prugga in the computer to the port, the internet isa all there. We copy it inside machine for fast access.
mis: Wait, so you're saying that you copied every single file on the internet into this box? That doesn't even make any sense! The internet is a constantly changing network of millions of individual machines. How does the PS3 update its so called "internet" if it has no connections to the real network?
Sony: Thasa right. No connections. Praystation 3 get internet from outerspace.
This reminds me of an issue I've been pondering on the past few years. My mom (like much of my extended family) reads a lot. However, despite my efforts to the contrary, she only reads non-fiction -- things like biographies, financial books, etc. She also reads a lot about angels, Nostradamus, etc, but I'll consider those nonfiction for the moment. Whenever I try to convince her to read fiction, she complains about how "it's not about real people" and thus irrelevant.
As for myself, I consider fiction an important factor in broadening my mind and shaping who I am. Any ideas of how I can convince her of this?
Even when one ignores the potential billions of dollars in the suborbital tourism market, this also opens the door for intercontinental spaceflights. Even if they don't go into orbit, it still lets people get around the globe quite fast ("one hour from New York to Tokyo") without having to worry about things like sonic booms along their path. Such intercontinental spaceflights are a nice transition to orbital flights.
Even if that's not enough to impress you, it certainly fills me with amazement.
Have you heard of WikiBooks? It's an open content textbook creation site, similar to wikipedia, and is precisely intended for what you describe. It's still pretty early in terms of content development, but there's a few nice textbooks there already.
>Is it true that much of what we perceive visually is imagery generated by the brain rather than directly produced in us by external stimuli?
This is quite true. As a concrete example, consider any one of a number of different optical illusions (typing onTreo, so can't provide good links). With these, what the brain perceives is very different from what actually falls on the retina. In a sense perception can be seen as a continuous hallucination, guided by sensory inputs, innate processes, and prior experience.
Slashdot Mirror
> Eventually there will be a strong desire to explore, but it's simply too expensive with our current level of technology.
The incredibly expensive costs have little to do with technology, and much to do with operations. When one designs a craft while intentionally trying to minimize operations costs, as has been done with SpaceShipOne and SpaceX's Falcon I and V, things get much cheaper. The defense companies which have been developing spacecraft thus far really haven't had any reason to minimize these sorts of costs, since it would just reduce the amount of money they received from the government.
Certainly not a Saturn V, but still interesting:
o ntent=http%3A//www.spacex.com/falcon_v.php
http://www.spacex.com/index.html?section=falcon&c
> SpaceShipOne is not driven by seeking of a return in investment - SpaceShipOne will never deliver a return of investment, primarily because it's useless as anything but a joy ride.
There is a logical transition from a craft like SpaceShipOne to craft capable of transcontinental spaceflights (e.g. Tokyo-NY in 2 hours). I suspect there will be a profitable market for this, easily enough to recoup the costs of investment.
I have no doubt that Armadillo will keep on going, and even though it might take a while longer, eventually create a phenomenal product. If you have any doubts, just watch this video of a perfect test flight they recently had. In the video you can see the unmanned craft fly straight up, above the camera's view, and then land down in the same spot perfectly. It's simply amazing.
> Whitney Huston's national anthem was only valued at $3.18 (perhaps she should be as upset as anyone). (Or does the disk only contain that one piece? In which case, um, I'm not at all sure what to say - especially if I'm to steer clear of legal action.)
The album contains two songs (totalling 3 minutes and 49 seconds), not one. What a deal!
Thankfully Bigelow Aerospace is working on inflatable space habitats (using former TransHab technology). They'll start in-space tests next year, on the maiden flight of SpaceX's (ultra-cheap) Falcon V rocket. With any luck we'll have a privately funded ISS-equivalent in a few years anyways, for a fraction of the cost.
Oh, really? Did that come out recently?
Really, I wonder if this one will allow users to install 3rd party software. With the current Sidekick programmers can develop and run their own software on an emulator, but aren't allowed to actually install it on the machines. People have implemented handy things like ssh clients, but unless you're an official Sidekick developer, you can't actually run it.
If they only allowed 3rd party software, I would have bought a Sidekick instead of shelling out the extra cash for a Treo 600.
With any luck, NASA will use this as an excuse to finally cut funding for the space shuttle and (temporarily) the space station. Seriously, these two programs have eaten up most of NASAs budget and have contributed essentially nil to either exploration or science (though I admit it was a nice way to improve foreign relations with Russia).
Hopefully they'd then use any excess funds to quickly develop a sane spaceflight system which doesn't try to transport crew and heavy cargo in the same ship, while helping the formation of a private space industry via Centennial Challenges prizes.
With any luck, NASA will use this as an excuse to finally cut funding for the space shuttle and (temporarily) the space station. Seriously, these two programs have eaten up most of NASAs budget and have contributed essentially nil to either exploration or science (though I admit it was a nice way to improve foreign relatioÈ
I wonder if Doom 3 will have any easter eggs referencing Armadillo Aerospace. It'd be quite amusing if one of United Aerospace Corporation craft happened to look an awful lot like the Black Armadillo.
I was actually referring to character_assassin. ;)
> Most people do not like interacting with machines. Human interaction is what we have evolved to be optimized for. Our brain has special structures for face tracking/recognition that are far faster than similar generalized systems in the brain. Many people are uncomfortable with and intimidated by high technology, but would not be with friendly, humanlike robots.
You have to be careful about the Uncanny Valley, though, at least according to a particular Japanese roboticist. Apparently once you get within a certain closeness of anthropomorphism, small things which aren't "quite right" can really freak people out.
The friendliness of Americans never ceases to amaze me...
On the subject of getting us out of Low Earth Orbit again, one month ago NASA organized a workshop to brainstorm and refine ideas for cash prizes, as part of the Centennial Challenges Program. I was on their web site, and noticed that a Post-Workshop Report is now available. There's quite a bit of good information there regarding possible prizes.
Here's a list of possible prize goals which were examined in detail (from TOC):
- Precision Lander
- Astronaut Glove
- Mobile Power Breakthrough
- Micro Reentry Vehicle
- Robot Triathlon
- Lunar Processing Demo
- Quantum Computer
- Lunar Landing
- Telerobotic Race
- General Aviation
- 3-Dimensional Detector
- Autonomous Earth Analog Sample Return
- Long-Duration Cryogenic Propellant Storage Tank
- Perpetual (30-Day) UAV
- Aircraft Engine
- Deployable Telescopes
- Aerocapture
- Autonomous UAV Cargo Hauler
- Human Radiation Shielding
- Solar Sail Race
- Rover Survivor
- Planetary Surface Power Transmission
- Extreme Environment Computer
- Mars Com/Nav Micromission
- Autonomous Drill
- Nanotube Tether
- In-Situ Life Detector
- Asteroid Mission
- Miniature Robotic Flyer
- Human Space Flight - Orbiter Technology
- Human Space Flight - Suborbital Flight
- Human Space Flight - PVT APOLLO 8
- Education
- Suborbital Flights for Scientific Payloads
I was thinking of passing out their flyer just for the heck of it (I'm a bit of a singularity fan), but they really need to make it more "shiny." If you want people to take a flyer from you, you need to have at least some sort of picture on it. A little more detail on the issues they examine might also be good.
And why doesn't it mention that they have an article by Greg Bear?!? (a fairly well-known sci-fi author)
Anybody feel like making some additions to their doc file and posting it here? I don't really have time myself at the moment...
Geeze, it's already made it into the wikipedia entry on Slashdot subculture.
Yeah, I agree. I found the content quite amusing, but the fake Japanese "written accent" got incredibly old after the first couple of times.
I remember seeing a preview interview of the Playstation 3 a few years ago.
Sony: Dreamcast? Ha ha, funny stupid yankee! You dishonor me with your mention of this Dreamcast. The Praystation 3 does not connect to internet, Praystation 3 CONTAIN the internet. You prugga in the computer to the port, the internet isa all there. We copy it inside machine for fast access.
mis: Wait, so you're saying that you copied every single file on the internet into this box? That doesn't even make any sense! The internet is a constantly changing network of millions of individual machines. How does the PS3 update its so called "internet" if it has no connections to the real network?
Sony: Thasa right. No connections. Praystation 3 get internet from outerspace.
mis: And its power?
Sony: It run on love.
This reminds me of an issue I've been pondering on the past few years. My mom (like much of my extended family) reads a lot. However, despite my efforts to the contrary, she only reads non-fiction -- things like biographies, financial books, etc. She also reads a lot about angels, Nostradamus, etc, but I'll consider those nonfiction for the moment. Whenever I try to convince her to read fiction, she complains about how "it's not about real people" and thus irrelevant.
As for myself, I consider fiction an important factor in broadening my mind and shaping who I am. Any ideas of how I can convince her of this?
Even when one ignores the potential billions of dollars in the suborbital tourism market, this also opens the door for intercontinental spaceflights. Even if they don't go into orbit, it still lets people get around the globe quite fast ("one hour from New York to Tokyo") without having to worry about things like sonic booms along their path. Such intercontinental spaceflights are a nice transition to orbital flights.
Even if that's not enough to impress you, it certainly fills me with amazement.
Exactly. He sounds a lot more like Nikola Tesla to me.
That project looks great! I'd also like to mention the newly created Arts bookshelf, which currently includes textbooks on topics like Graphic Design, Guitar, and Game Design and Programming. In the future, it'll hopefully include textbooks on Paper Airplanes and LEGO Design. If you're knowledgeable about any of these areas, please contribute!
Here are some other textbooks slashdot readers may be interested in contributing to:
* Bourne Shell Scripting
* Computer Programming
* Intelligence Intensification
* Book for Geeks
* Getting a girl
Have you heard of WikiBooks? It's an open content textbook creation site, similar to wikipedia, and is precisely intended for what you describe. It's still pretty early in terms of content development, but there's a few nice textbooks there already.
>Is it true that much of what we perceive visually is imagery generated by the brain rather than directly produced in us by external stimuli?
This is quite true. As a concrete example, consider any one of a number of different optical illusions (typing onTreo, so can't provide good links). With these, what the brain perceives is very different from what actually falls on the retina. In a sense perception can be seen as a continuous hallucination, guided by sensory inputs, innate processes, and prior experience.