It just had to. The SAC-D satellite was built in Argentina, by a government-owned company. And elections are nearby. It would be a shame to our president if the launch failed:D
OK, just to clarify the article: the "collaboration" of Argentina in this project consisted in the design, construction, tracking, and operation of the satellite. The SAC-D is an Argentine satellite for the most part, built in collaboration with NASA and France, Italy and Canadian space agencies.
So the aquarius is an instrument on board of an Argentine satellite.
I think the measuring of salinity is a very cool project that could help understand global-scale weather. But the fact that a country considered a "third world" country is building satellites (and also uranium enrichment facilities, nuclear reactors, and many other high-tech things) should be mentioned too.
Technically AC is right. It's not a ROM if you can write to it. Back in the old days of silicon, a ROM was a custom-made chip. You didn't "program" it, the program (or whatever data it held) was the silicon circuit itself.
A few years later they came up with PROMs, programmable ROMs, which are programmed by blowing internal fuses (or antifuses). Later they had EPROMs (UV-Erasable, PROMs), and EEPROMS (Electrically-erasable).
Flash is also a kind of ROM too, just one that allows faster programming.
See how I never said "write", but instead I said "program". "Writing" is what a running program does to the system's RAM. "Programming" is what specialized hardware does to PROM/Flash when nothing else is running (except maybe a bootloader that can program the system itself). They are two very different concepts.
Yes, forgot to mention that. For some reason, the 50mm 1.4 is much cheaper than the 35mm. It's just that 50mm is a bit long for indoors. But you're right, a newbie shouldn't be shelling out $1500 for a lens. No idea about Tamrons, Sigmas or anything. I only have the nikon cheap lenses (the 18-55 kit and a 55-200 that's $150 or so). Maybe there is a cheaper 50mm 1.4. I wouldn't go too crazy for quality as a normal prime lens is almost foolproof. Unless someone put plastic elements in it, any brand should work excellent. Don't worry about multicoat, nano coating, extra-low dispersion glass, fluoride, etc. Just get the cheapest 35 or 50 1.4 (which is compatible with your camera's AF). A used one should work great.
I have two printers. One is an A4 Epson Stylus Photo R220. I recommend epson because the ink is cheaper than HP's (Epson's print head is in the printer, not in the cartridge). The "Photo" in this case means two things: it's got 6 colors (CMYK + Light cyan + Light magenta. For some reason, light cyan goes away twice as fast as the other colors), and most important: the driver lets you use color profiles. This is a big thing - it's like owning a camera with M (full manual) mode vs a cheap "AUTO" camera. You need this for a fully color-managed workflow. Well, except the monitor, which, unless you get an HP DreamColor, won't be able to go beyond sRGB.
My other printer is an A3+ HP K8600. This one is a "Business Inkjet" printer. It's great for printing text (HP inkjets are much better than Epson in this regard, and it hasn't changed since the Stylus 440/DeskJet 692C from the mid-90s), but it SUCKS for photos. This is not a photo printer. It can print photos but the colors don't come out right, it's grainy (the Epson Photos have more DPI), but most important: it doesn't support color management. All is printed as HP "RealLife Enhancement". You don't want this for photos. Also, the HP DOESN'T use the black ink on photo paper. It's a thing of dye-vs-pigment ink (I don't know which is which, and I don't care). The thing is, HP business black ink doesn't stick to photo paper. I tried - it dries and it's just black dust. Epson black sticks to photo paper just as well as the other colors. HP makes black by squeezing half your C, M and Y carts in every print. The resulting black is terrible - greenish brown.
I mentioned "photo" and "business" printers. Epson has another line (maybe HP does too, I haven't checked), I think they call it "Artisan". 9 cartridges (includes grey and another black and yet another black for matte finish). These are A3 and larger, and damn expensive. They're expensive to maintain too, and you only get the intended colors if you're using Epson ink and Epson paper.
If you're just trying to have "fun", I'd recommend that you get the one of the Epson "Photo". Don't go with the Artisan just yet. Or maybe not. If you got a Canon 1D or Nikon D3, go for the Artisan (hell, if you have a $7K camera just for fun, you're loaded, go continuous tone!). If you have a Nikon D3/5/7000 or Canon Rebel, go for the Photo printer. Get the Artisan when someone is actually paying for your photos and you do your own exposition.
Or better yet: don't spend your money on a printer at all. Get GEAR. You will be needing, in this order: a 35mm f/1.8 or less lens. Learn composition and take pics with low light. a 50-200mm, or 70-300, to go out taking photos of birds and stuff a tripod, when you realize that, unlike the 35mm it's fucking hard to hold a 300mm steady by hand a flash, with remote trigger, when you want to give your photos a "pro" look (only when you get this one you will understand why they call it "photoGRAPHY") a flash stand and umbrella, when you get tired of bouncing at the ceiling another flash, stand, and umbrella a few more small flashes. yes. you will be going crazy with flashes. see strobist.blogspot.com a macro lens, or extension tubes, diopters, bellows, and other macro gear a soft box (this one you can DIY) a ring flash maybe by now it will make sense to invest in a printer. but there's so much more you can get like: background stands gaffer tape - lots of it paper backgrounds fabric backgrounds more lenses! studio flashes (yes, more flashes) more and bigger umbrellas soft boxes another camera
Don't worry about the WAF (Wife Acceptance Factor). This is where the 35mm f/1.8 comes into play: get some pics of your kid at head level (you will need to crawl if you have a toddler. Protip: you will get much more interesting shots at waist, knee or even floor level, than eye level), set your camera to Aperture Priority and go all the way down to 1.4, "Vivid" color and white balance to a higher point to get a warmer image. Snap. You
"Regular" coated paper, which is usually 108gr (vs 75-90gr), for inkjet it's much, much better than regular paper. It's whiter, feels softer, and doesn't suck ink like regular paper. You can print photos on it and they will look pretty good (not just a brown smudge). Ink will not go through so you can print both sides (but it usually is coated in only one side).
A pack of 100 sheets costs like $5. It's expensive, but if you need to print a nice report and don't have a color laser, it will give great results. The colors, especially the reds, will appear much brighter in that paper.
Also, inkjet is always more expensive than the print shop downstairs, even after you print enough photos (a few hundred) to pay for the printer - unless you use a CISS but it's hard to find quality inks. Right now I use a german brand (OCP) in generic chinese paper (60cm wide roll) and I'm simply amazed at the results. But it takes just too much work: 1. Check if your printer driver lets you print in color managed (ICC) mode. Choose Adobe RGB, and disable any post processing at driver level 2. Make sure your monitor is calibrated, or at least, it's configured for 6500K white. The sRGB function should work relatively good. 3. take photo in adobe RGB, if you have a pro camera; or convert to it from sRGB, if you have a consumer camera. 4. Make sure the gamma setting on the printer is right 5. make sure you're setting the right paper kind in your printer "Ultra High Quality Super Gloss Eternal Archival Pixie Dust Photo Paper", or some other silly name. 6. Print, and see if you got it right. 7. Repeat 6 when you figure out which of the other 6 steps you screwed up. 8. Repeat everything again when you notice you forgot to enable "borderless printing"
Good luck if using alternate brands of paper and ink. You can have them profiled for a few bucks, if your printer driver lets you load ink and paper profiles, and save a lot. But for the odd print, stick with original ink and the manufacturer's paper.
Ah, I was just waiting for this comment. I have news for you: the "local placethat print photos" is just amazingly cheap. It's not always great.
Photo printing, done right, gives perfect results. 1) An incredible gamut (more than you can get out of your inkjet); 2) extremely long life photos 3) paper that won't turn yellow or degrade.
But in local, cheap photo shops, this is not the case.
1) The gamut comes because of the printing system. A properly calibrated minilab (that means once a week at least, though it can go for months with no calibration and still do acceptable output) has no issues *printing* the correct gamut. The problem is the chemicals needed to develop the paper. Remember, it's regular, chemical-based printing. After a certain amount of square meters developed, the chemicals *need* to be changed. Cheap photo shops get away with adding some chemicals (Replenisher) to the solution that extends its life a little - which is fine and acceptable. It's made by the manufacturer and under certain conditions it will work just as good. But often, these guys at photo labs keep adding the chemicals until all you have is a useless liquid that won't develop anything and we're back to 1980s colors, and only then, they will change the developer. Respectable shops can change the developer and other chemicals as needed - but they charge more than the 1-hour lab at the mall.
2) the long life of the photo comes from proper developing. Because of the destructive process used to develop photos ("ink" is removed from the paper, not added to it, like in the Kodachrome process, which lasts forever), if not done properly, the chemical reaction keeps going for years after the photo is developed (that's why photos fade). There are two steps: stopping and washing, that need to be properly done, in order to actually stop the reaction. If you remove the photo from the stopping bath (or if it's cold, old, contaminated, etc), or don't properly wash the print, the chemicals will continue affecting your print for years.
3) photo paper is not regular "wood fibre" paper, which would disintegrate in all the liquids it needs to be processed in. It's either resin-coated or polyester. Polyester won't turn yellow, and it's not food for bugs, among other benefits.
So, try to develop your photos at a respectable lab.
And for that one-off print you want to give grandma of the kids playing with her that day, the inkjet on photo paper (especially a 6-color epson - even better if 9-color) is much more practical than driving to the lab and having just 1 print developed.
Slashdot Mirror
You're not american, are you?
It just had to. The SAC-D satellite was built in Argentina, by a government-owned company. And elections are nearby. It would be a shame to our president if the launch failed :D
OK, just to clarify the article: the "collaboration" of Argentina in this project consisted in the design, construction, tracking, and operation of the satellite. The SAC-D is an Argentine satellite for the most part, built in collaboration with NASA and France, Italy and Canadian space agencies.
So the aquarius is an instrument on board of an Argentine satellite.
I think the measuring of salinity is a very cool project that could help understand global-scale weather. But the fact that a country considered a "third world" country is building satellites (and also uranium enrichment facilities, nuclear reactors, and many other high-tech things) should be mentioned too.
Durability? Try induction lighting. Rated for 50.000+ hours. Shitty light, but you can't get any longer life than that.
Same reason I chose it for my home server. That, and the fact that it supports ECC memory.
Well, of course China has few prisoners. They just execute the "bad apples", even if they didn't actually commit the crime. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_in_China#Crimes_punishable_by_death
When will you bring the law above all laws then?
why do you even answer to AC?
Technically AC is right. It's not a ROM if you can write to it.
Back in the old days of silicon, a ROM was a custom-made chip. You didn't "program" it, the program (or whatever data it held) was the silicon circuit itself.
A few years later they came up with PROMs, programmable ROMs, which are programmed by blowing internal fuses (or antifuses). Later they had EPROMs (UV-Erasable, PROMs), and EEPROMS (Electrically-erasable).
Flash is also a kind of ROM too, just one that allows faster programming.
See how I never said "write", but instead I said "program". "Writing" is what a running program does to the system's RAM. "Programming" is what specialized hardware does to PROM/Flash when nothing else is running (except maybe a bootloader that can program the system itself). They are two very different concepts.
640K ought to be enough for everyone.
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/regular
(...)
1. With constant frequency or pattern.
2. (mostly US) Normal; ordinary
(...)
why do I, a native Spanish speaker, have to teach an english speaker, his own language?
Yes, forgot to mention that. For some reason, the 50mm 1.4 is much cheaper than the 35mm. It's just that 50mm is a bit long for indoors. But you're right, a newbie shouldn't be shelling out $1500 for a lens.
No idea about Tamrons, Sigmas or anything. I only have the nikon cheap lenses (the 18-55 kit and a 55-200 that's $150 or so). Maybe there is a cheaper 50mm 1.4. I wouldn't go too crazy for quality as a normal prime lens is almost foolproof. Unless someone put plastic elements in it, any brand should work excellent. Don't worry about multicoat, nano coating, extra-low dispersion glass, fluoride, etc. Just get the cheapest 35 or 50 1.4 (which is compatible with your camera's AF). A used one should work great.
I have two printers. One is an A4 Epson Stylus Photo R220. I recommend epson because the ink is cheaper than HP's (Epson's print head is in the printer, not in the cartridge). The "Photo" in this case means two things: it's got 6 colors (CMYK + Light cyan + Light magenta. For some reason, light cyan goes away twice as fast as the other colors), and most important: the driver lets you use color profiles. This is a big thing - it's like owning a camera with M (full manual) mode vs a cheap "AUTO" camera. You need this for a fully color-managed workflow. Well, except the monitor, which, unless you get an HP DreamColor, won't be able to go beyond sRGB.
My other printer is an A3+ HP K8600. This one is a "Business Inkjet" printer. It's great for printing text (HP inkjets are much better than Epson in this regard, and it hasn't changed since the Stylus 440/DeskJet 692C from the mid-90s), but it SUCKS for photos. This is not a photo printer. It can print photos but the colors don't come out right, it's grainy (the Epson Photos have more DPI), but most important: it doesn't support color management. All is printed as HP "RealLife Enhancement". You don't want this for photos. Also, the HP DOESN'T use the black ink on photo paper. It's a thing of dye-vs-pigment ink (I don't know which is which, and I don't care). The thing is, HP business black ink doesn't stick to photo paper. I tried - it dries and it's just black dust. Epson black sticks to photo paper just as well as the other colors. HP makes black by squeezing half your C, M and Y carts in every print. The resulting black is terrible - greenish brown.
I mentioned "photo" and "business" printers. Epson has another line (maybe HP does too, I haven't checked), I think they call it "Artisan". 9 cartridges (includes grey and another black and yet another black for matte finish). These are A3 and larger, and damn expensive. They're expensive to maintain too, and you only get the intended colors if you're using Epson ink and Epson paper.
If you're just trying to have "fun", I'd recommend that you get the one of the Epson "Photo". Don't go with the Artisan just yet. Or maybe not. If you got a Canon 1D or Nikon D3, go for the Artisan (hell, if you have a $7K camera just for fun, you're loaded, go continuous tone!). If you have a Nikon D3/5/7000 or Canon Rebel, go for the Photo printer. Get the Artisan when someone is actually paying for your photos and you do your own exposition.
Or better yet: don't spend your money on a printer at all. Get GEAR. You will be needing, in this order:
a 35mm f/1.8 or less lens. Learn composition and take pics with low light.
a 50-200mm, or 70-300, to go out taking photos of birds and stuff
a tripod, when you realize that, unlike the 35mm it's fucking hard to hold a 300mm steady by hand
a flash, with remote trigger, when you want to give your photos a "pro" look (only when you get this one you will understand why they call it "photoGRAPHY")
a flash stand and umbrella, when you get tired of bouncing at the ceiling
another flash, stand, and umbrella
a few more small flashes. yes. you will be going crazy with flashes. see strobist.blogspot.com
a macro lens, or extension tubes, diopters, bellows, and other macro gear
a soft box (this one you can DIY)
a ring flash
maybe by now it will make sense to invest in a printer. but there's so much more you can get like:
background stands
gaffer tape - lots of it
paper backgrounds
fabric backgrounds
more lenses!
studio flashes (yes, more flashes)
more and bigger umbrellas
soft boxes
another camera
Don't worry about the WAF (Wife Acceptance Factor). This is where the 35mm f/1.8 comes into play: get some pics of your kid at head level (you will need to crawl if you have a toddler. Protip: you will get much more interesting shots at waist, knee or even floor level, than eye level), set your camera to Aperture Priority and go all the way down to 1.4, "Vivid" color and white balance to a higher point to get a warmer image. Snap. You
"Regular" coated paper, which is usually 108gr (vs 75-90gr), for inkjet it's much, much better than regular paper. It's whiter, feels softer, and doesn't suck ink like regular paper. You can print photos on it and they will look pretty good (not just a brown smudge). Ink will not go through so you can print both sides (but it usually is coated in only one side).
A pack of 100 sheets costs like $5. It's expensive, but if you need to print a nice report and don't have a color laser, it will give great results. The colors, especially the reds, will appear much brighter in that paper.
http://hardware.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2188752&cid=36257328
Also, inkjet is always more expensive than the print shop downstairs, even after you print enough photos (a few hundred) to pay for the printer - unless you use a CISS but it's hard to find quality inks. Right now I use a german brand (OCP) in generic chinese paper (60cm wide roll) and I'm simply amazed at the results. But it takes just too much work:
1. Check if your printer driver lets you print in color managed (ICC) mode. Choose Adobe RGB, and disable any post processing at driver level
2. Make sure your monitor is calibrated, or at least, it's configured for 6500K white. The sRGB function should work relatively good.
3. take photo in adobe RGB, if you have a pro camera; or convert to it from sRGB, if you have a consumer camera.
4. Make sure the gamma setting on the printer is right
5. make sure you're setting the right paper kind in your printer "Ultra High Quality Super Gloss Eternal Archival Pixie Dust Photo Paper", or some other silly name.
6. Print, and see if you got it right.
7. Repeat 6 when you figure out which of the other 6 steps you screwed up.
8. Repeat everything again when you notice you forgot to enable "borderless printing"
Good luck if using alternate brands of paper and ink. You can have them profiled for a few bucks, if your printer driver lets you load ink and paper profiles, and save a lot. But for the odd print, stick with original ink and the manufacturer's paper.
Cause of this: http://hardware.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2188752&cid=36257328
betcha didn't know that.
You laugh, but in some countries (apparently, the UK), trying to print a photo of your 2-year-old playing in the bathtub can get you arrested.
Ah, I was just waiting for this comment. I have news for you: the "local placethat print photos" is just amazingly cheap. It's not always great.
Photo printing, done right, gives perfect results. 1) An incredible gamut (more than you can get out of your inkjet); 2) extremely long life photos 3) paper that won't turn yellow or degrade.
But in local, cheap photo shops, this is not the case.
1) The gamut comes because of the printing system. A properly calibrated minilab (that means once a week at least, though it can go for months with no calibration and still do acceptable output) has no issues *printing* the correct gamut. The problem is the chemicals needed to develop the paper. Remember, it's regular, chemical-based printing. After a certain amount of square meters developed, the chemicals *need* to be changed. Cheap photo shops get away with adding some chemicals (Replenisher) to the solution that extends its life a little - which is fine and acceptable. It's made by the manufacturer and under certain conditions it will work just as good. But often, these guys at photo labs keep adding the chemicals until all you have is a useless liquid that won't develop anything and we're back to 1980s colors, and only then, they will change the developer. Respectable shops can change the developer and other chemicals as needed - but they charge more than the 1-hour lab at the mall.
2) the long life of the photo comes from proper developing. Because of the destructive process used to develop photos ("ink" is removed from the paper, not added to it, like in the Kodachrome process, which lasts forever), if not done properly, the chemical reaction keeps going for years after the photo is developed (that's why photos fade). There are two steps: stopping and washing, that need to be properly done, in order to actually stop the reaction. If you remove the photo from the stopping bath (or if it's cold, old, contaminated, etc), or don't properly wash the print, the chemicals will continue affecting your print for years.
3) photo paper is not regular "wood fibre" paper, which would disintegrate in all the liquids it needs to be processed in. It's either resin-coated or polyester. Polyester won't turn yellow, and it's not food for bugs, among other benefits.
So, try to develop your photos at a respectable lab.
And for that one-off print you want to give grandma of the kids playing with her that day, the inkjet on photo paper (especially a 6-color epson - even better if 9-color) is much more practical than driving to the lab and having just 1 print developed.
Dude, I don't manage any Windows servers. I run Linux and Solaris.
Fuck you.
I was modded down, so here is my comment again:
OK, I'm going to play the "CORRELATION IS NOT CAUSATION" card, that Slashdot fans like to use all the time.
If I get modded down, you will see how hypocrite slashdotters are.
And, also, here is a link for you, memory-challenged fanboy (gee, it wasn't even 6 months ago and we already forgot about it?)
http://tech.slashdot.org/story/10/12/23/0415203/Skype-Outage-Hits-Users-Worldwide [slashdot.org]
I'm not in the mood to google more "skype outages" for you. Do your own homework.
http://slashdot.org/story/07/08/20/150258/Skype-Blames-Microsoft-Patch-Tuesday-for-Outage
cunt.
Why is this modded down? Google, is that you?
OK, I'm going to play the "CORRELATION IS NOT CAUSATION" card, that Slashdot fans like to use all the time.
If I get modded down, you will see how hypocrite slashdotters are.
And, also, here is a link for you, memory-challenged fanboy (gee, it wasn't even 6 months ago and we already forgot about it?)
http://tech.slashdot.org/story/10/12/23/0415203/Skype-Outage-Hits-Users-Worldwide
I'm not in the mood to google more "skype outages" for you. Do your own homework.
You forgot the roadblock with the "Under Construction" sign.
McClaaaaaaaaaaane!