This is a very interesting article but
the figure of 300,000 to 400,000 deaths
is ludicrous. So far as I can tell,
Chernobyl accident is responsible for
less than 10,000 fatalities (there will
be more as time goes on).
Of course, that's a horrible number of
deaths from an industrial accident. Comparable or perhaps not as bad as Bhopal.
See
this rather old reference
Re:Hubble cost seven times too much using shuttle
on
The Wrong Stuff
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
the problem with this is that there is zero
chance that astronomers would get the
money to fund seven Hubbles.
Imagine asking the granting agency for
5 billion dollars for seven
telescopes (six of them basically redundant). Great to have alright, but
there is no way it will be funded.
Instead, the astronomers just had to ask
for the single telescope cost with an
already eager launch partner who wanted
to use the Shuttle for something.
The choice was not between 1 Hubble +
shuttle and 7 Hubbles + disposable launchers,
because absolutely nobody would take the
latter seriously.
This cost comparison is just plain
ridiculous and Weinberg - who is a *very*
smart man - should be ashamed of himself
for making it.
However, I fear that his final paragraph
gets at the essential truth here. The
President's "initiative" actually places
the space program at serious risk of
collapse. Two examples: is it wise toretire your human
launch vehicle *years before* a replacement;
is it smart to retire your premier space telescope years
before its replacement is ready. Once the
USA loses manned spaceflight capacity, it's
not obvious the money will actually be found
to replace it.
At a local library sale I noticed some
Encyclopedia Brittanicas here and there,
and managed to collect the whole set (1969).
When I asked them how much they wanted for
the 24 volumes, they had no idea, and settled
for 50 cents a volume.
You'd be surprised
how many articles are still "up to date".
And the '69 Britannica still had a lot of the
older articles by quite famous scientists.
The article on electro-magnetism is highly
impressive, and the one on the history and
nature of mathematical logic is written by
Alonzo Church! (I understand newer Britannicas
have dumbed down considerably, which is a
shame.)
Anyway, I think they are well worth their 5 feet
of shelf space and $12 CDN.
the rovers have done fantastic work, raising
a multitude of fascinating questions.
In fact, isn't it obvious that the questions
are coming a lot faster than the answers?
The prime lesson of the rovers is the need of
a team of human geologists on the spot with
a field laboratory.
I would say more than 100 times the capability
for way way less than 100 times the cost (that
would be 830 million times 100 = 83 billion).
no it is theft; iirc the drawing of energy
from the field will increase inductance (??)
and somewhat decrease the power transmitted
on the line (not much). I've heard tell
of people using this method to light billboards
and being charged with power theft... might
be just an urban legend.
I once got quite a little jolt from touching
a barbed wire fence that ran parallel to
a high tension wire... kind of like those
electric fences used for animals (no current
so I'm here to write about it, but plenty
of volts). Speaking of urban myths (or not),
I've also been told a story of someone being
killed by touching a large metal pipeline that
ran parallel to major power lines.
Let's make some assumptions that should
help make the case for this kind of
screening:
Frequency of terrorists in the sample
population:.0002
Sensitivity of test:.9
(That's the chance the test says x is a terrorist given that x really is one)
Specificity of test:.01
(that's the chance the test says x is a terrorist given that x is not one - false positive rate)
These assumptions and good old Bayes' Theorem
allow us to say that if x tests positive for being a terrorist then there is... a 2 in one hundred chance he really is one.
Given that the frequency of terrorists (even just at airports) is **way** less than.0002, and that the test is not nearly as reliable as these figures assume (IMHO), the result will be even worse.
The article is very out dated, but the point
remains valid. It is worth saving the Hubble
for science work...
As it stands, the new Bush space initiative
will lead to Hubble's loss before any
replacement is in place. Who knows if the
Webb 'scope will fly on schedule (not very
likely really is it?).
Second, American capacity for manned space
flight will be lost for some years
before its replacement flies. Who knows if
the new "space exploration vehicle" will
fly on time (not very likely is it really).
The american space progral is likely to
just fade away under the budget pressure
of war/feed-the-rich expenditures.
Face it, the next American on the moon, will
have to go through Chinese passport control.
humble my ass... a "mistake" in a work
that is under copyright investigation is
like a gold nugget; that's why the old map
makers would put in mistaken information in
their maps. When the false info turned up in
some competitor's map... wham.
Pinky: what are we going to do tonight?
Brain: the same thing we do every night, try
to take over the world with our homemade
cruise missile
Re:Soon to be decided
on
SCOrched Earth
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
"If the judge has any guts he will simply order SCO to reveal with specificity the exact claims made within a short period of time with a proviso that if he believes the discovery to be made in bad faith he will simply choose a set of SCO's claims at random and if IBM can show these to be baseless make a finding of fact that SCO has failled to substantiate its claim."
The magistrate has ruled. She has given SCO
30 days to reveal "with specificity" exactly
what code IBM has "infringed". She also suspened
all other discovery -- meaning that IBM does
not have to provide SCO with anything until
after SCO complies with her first order.
Looks like preparatory to dismissal unless SCO
comes up with something very damning to IBM (
how likely is that???).
The question that is fundamental here is: why have copyright laws?
Musicians perhaps should make their money by performing, writers by reading, coders by coding, etc. Copyright has permitted as system in which non-producers can get very rich by what is arguably abuse of copyright.
Even if copyright laws are acceptable, why should copyright last more than, say, six months? That would take care of first run movies, new cds, new books etc. Lengthy copyright may provide a pension scheme for a few producers, but mostly is a way for non-producers to accumulate vast, arguably unearned wealth.
I suggest a gradual shortening of copyright down to six months, with the ultimate aim of eliminating this outmoded concept.
Slashdot Mirror
but still no link or explanation; you are being pointlessly obfuscatory
sorry, the link did not work properly. It is here
This is a very interesting article but the figure of 300,000 to 400,000 deaths is ludicrous. So far as I can tell, Chernobyl accident is responsible for less than 10,000 fatalities (there will be more as time goes on).
Of course, that's a horrible number of deaths from an industrial accident. Comparable or perhaps not as bad as Bhopal.
See this rather old reference
the problem with this is that there is zero chance that astronomers would get the money to fund seven Hubbles.
Imagine asking the granting agency for 5 billion dollars for seven telescopes (six of them basically redundant). Great to have alright, but there is no way it will be funded.
Instead, the astronomers just had to ask for the single telescope cost with an already eager launch partner who wanted to use the Shuttle for something.
The choice was not between 1 Hubble + shuttle and 7 Hubbles + disposable launchers, because absolutely nobody would take the latter seriously.
This cost comparison is just plain ridiculous and Weinberg - who is a *very* smart man - should be ashamed of himself for making it.
However, I fear that his final paragraph gets at the essential truth here. The President's "initiative" actually places the space program at serious risk of collapse. Two examples: is it wise toretire your human launch vehicle *years before* a replacement; is it smart to retire your premier space telescope years before its replacement is ready. Once the USA loses manned spaceflight capacity, it's not obvious the money will actually be found to replace it.
At a local library sale I noticed some Encyclopedia Brittanicas here and there, and managed to collect the whole set (1969). When I asked them how much they wanted for the 24 volumes, they had no idea, and settled for 50 cents a volume.
You'd be surprised how many articles are still "up to date". And the '69 Britannica still had a lot of the older articles by quite famous scientists. The article on electro-magnetism is highly impressive, and the one on the history and nature of mathematical logic is written by Alonzo Church! (I understand newer Britannicas have dumbed down considerably, which is a shame.)
Anyway, I think they are well worth their 5 feet of shelf space and $12 CDN.
the rovers have done fantastic work, raising a multitude of fascinating questions.
In fact, isn't it obvious that the questions are coming a lot faster than the answers? The prime lesson of the rovers is the need of a team of human geologists on the spot with a field laboratory.
I would say more than 100 times the capability for way way less than 100 times the cost (that would be 830 million times 100 = 83 billion).
vaporware
I don't think so. for cover songs you need a "mechanical license" from the owner (eminem is owner/writer etc here).
didn't you hear, even the girl scouts can't cover campfire songs without permission. See here.
So he has a case unless your parody argument could be maintained, which I also doubt.
no it is theft; iirc the drawing of energy from the field will increase inductance (??) and somewhat decrease the power transmitted on the line (not much). I've heard tell of people using this method to light billboards and being charged with power theft ... might
be just an urban legend.
... kind of like those
electric fences used for animals (no current
so I'm here to write about it, but plenty
of volts). Speaking of urban myths (or not),
I've also been told a story of someone being
killed by touching a large metal pipeline that
ran parallel to major power lines.
I once got quite a little jolt from touching a barbed wire fence that ran parallel to a high tension wire
it would be a difficult study to undertake; rats are known to dislike wearing those tiny headphones, and it is hard to select music they enjoy
now what is that supposed to mean exactly?
... maybe
... less likely
... hardly
90% of wine is crap
90% of expensive wine is crap
90% of the bottles of 2000 Terres Des Papes are crap
I'm looking around my room: is 90% of everything crap? Maybe in your room but not mine!
What is the *precise* statement of Sturgeon's law?
> If you have your own airplane, you don't
...
> need to do anything but get in and go, just
> like in your own car.
If you believe this you are amazingly naive. Or else you've just given Bin Laden a great idea about how to spend some money
Let's make some assumptions that should help make the case for this kind of screening:
.0002
.9
.01
... a 2 in one hundred chance he really is one.
.0002, and that the test is not nearly as reliable as these figures assume (IMHO), the result will be even worse.
Frequency of terrorists in the sample population:
Sensitivity of test:
(That's the chance the test says x is a terrorist given that x really is one)
Specificity of test:
(that's the chance the test says x is a terrorist given that x is not one - false positive rate)
These assumptions and good old Bayes' Theorem allow us to say that if x tests positive for being a terrorist then there is
Given that the frequency of terrorists (even just at airports) is **way** less than
General screening is basically worthless.
The article is very out dated, but the point remains valid. It is worth saving the Hubble for science work ...
As it stands, the new Bush space initiative will lead to Hubble's loss before any replacement is in place. Who knows if the Webb 'scope will fly on schedule (not very likely really is it?).
Second, American capacity for manned space flight will be lost for some years before its replacement flies. Who knows if the new "space exploration vehicle" will fly on time (not very likely is it really).
The american space progral is likely to just fade away under the budget pressure of war/feed-the-rich expenditures.
Face it, the next American on the moon, will have to go through Chinese passport control.
Sad in a way.
are you for real or just trolling?
... (like mandrake update for example)
this is a release candidate
Your granny does not want to install this. When it's released her linux distro will have a nice upgrade path
OTOH, if you want to help kde hunt bugs, learn how to compile the software!
So the new space initiative will have hubble destroyed *before* a replacement telescope (webb) is up.
It will leave the shuttle destroyed *before* a new human rated vehicle is in place.
Of course, it is likely that both these projects will die under the weight of the war/feed-the-rich deficit.
The next american on the moon will have to go through a chinese passport control. You wait and see!
humble my ass ... a "mistake" in a work
that is under copyright investigation is
like a gold nugget; that's why the old map
makers would put in mistaken information in
their maps. When the false info turned up in
some competitor's map ... wham.
Linus is setting SCO up for something similar
read the post - you can copy your own stuff, but you can't then give away the copies ...
(but you can give away the original - once)
Pinky: what are we going to do tonight?
Brain: the same thing we do every night, try to take over the world with our homemade cruise missile
"If the judge has any guts he will simply order SCO to reveal with specificity the exact claims made within a short period of time with a proviso that if he believes the discovery to be made in bad faith he will simply choose a set of SCO's claims at random and if IBM can show these to be baseless make a finding of fact that SCO has failled to substantiate its claim."
The magistrate has ruled. She has given SCO 30 days to reveal "with specificity" exactly what code IBM has "infringed". She also suspened all other discovery -- meaning that IBM does not have to provide SCO with anything until after SCO complies with her first order.
Looks like preparatory to dismissal unless SCO comes up with something very damning to IBM ( how likely is that???).
well you still got it wrong: precedent; I don't think Freud is your problem
>> Sick of gentoo zealots throwing plugs in completely unrelated topics? Me too!
if we were all using gentoo, the problem would be easy to solve:
emerge good_gov
(hard to satisfy the dependencies though)
judging by your signature, you're canadian,
... a taskless thanks ...
so you should know there is absolutely no
point in writing to your senator.
Nice definition of a canadian senator:
The question that is fundamental here is: why have copyright laws?
Musicians perhaps should make their money by performing, writers by reading, coders by coding, etc. Copyright has permitted as system in which non-producers can get very rich by what is arguably abuse of copyright.
Even if copyright laws are acceptable, why should copyright last more than, say, six months? That would take care of first run movies, new cds, new books etc. Lengthy copyright may provide a pension scheme for a few producers, but mostly is a way for non-producers to accumulate vast, arguably unearned wealth.
I suggest a gradual shortening of copyright down to six months, with the ultimate aim of eliminating this outmoded concept.
remember -- "buy nothing day" is logically equivalent to "earn nothing day"
(putting off purchaces doesn't count!)