There is no "root".
Nothing can alter any system files. Outside of athenticated updates to the OS.
No process family can use more than 90% of system resorces.
The only process than can alter an executible file is one spawned by that process.
Drivers are treated as any other process and have no special writes or privliges.
All process are limited to their own memory space and a messaging system to comunicate with other programs and the OS.
That's a good start you need to add a lot of varification above this so you can handel corrupted memory gracefully.
PS: The closest thing to a real OS most people use is the JAVA VM.
If an OS can crash because of software then it has a basic design flaw. If an OS can get a virus then it has a basic design flaw. The only thing that should cause an OS to crash is severely corrupted memory and or CPU. I have worked with software that can function as the system RAM is being actively corrupted. Few people want to pay for this level of software but you can design an OS that will still run if you randomly rip out ram chip but hey let's blame it on the l33t hackers and say it's the software's fault.
Sorry by "every little bit helps" I meant incremental design changes can take a basic design from horribly expensive to reasonable cost. Right now we get people into space at around 7 / 600mil = 85mil a person. I think a system that drops that down to 20mil would be a huge savings AND a reasonable goal. Now the simplest way to do this is build a ship that is 1/4 as large and I expect them to do that but they are many other improvements that would be useful. One of the largest costs in the project is the amount of inspection each peace needs to be put though so either reducing the number of pieces OR reducing the stresses those pieces are under would reduce the costs. That's the "every little bit helps" that I am talking about.
The amount of care a car went though over it's first 100k miles was a lot higher 20 years ago than it is today AND cars are more complex today AND cars get better gas mileage AND cars have more powerful engines. The complexity is a sacrifice to give you more power and mileage but it's reasonable because of the huge reduction in overall cost. Now I think we could do the same thing for the next gen shuttle. Yes, complexity is a bad thing, but it can be a useful sacrifice if it gives you a lower overall cost.
A 32bit PCI bus at 33 MHz is only has a "theoretical" bandwidth of 127.2MB/s or a little over what 2 drives should do in a RAID 0. http://www.pcguide.com/ref/mbsys/buses/funcBandwid th-c.html depending on the Mother Board you may need to share with the network card and the sound card and everything else.
So, you have to read from all four disks in a four-disk array. You read from three to get the data, read from the fourth to get the parity bit, then calculate the parity to verify that your read was valid. Ok think about what your saying if you need all 4 disks then the array would stop working if one disk went bad. Now it might be a good idea to do what your saying IF you don't trust the system to detect if a disk goes bad, but you did not talk about doing this with the RAID 10 setup so either you accept the slight chance of a read error and get to use all disks independently on a read or you don't get to do this for any array.
PS: Once again I am suggesting using 2 disks + the parity disk to read sequential data and then have the 3rd disk read some other data. With a good buffer you can rotate which disk is doing the independent read and get the full sequential read speed of all 4 disks over time.
When looking at Japan and China the average age is 10 years apart and the average lifespan is 10 years apart BUT if the average person lives to be 10 years older then the average age should be 5 years higher not 10. China has a large % of their younger population leaving each year which is helping to keep their numbers low (each migrant acts as a death.) but as their economy improves more of these people will stay increasing the average age. Anyway, the point is like the US baby boom population trends will alter their economic situation.
A classic example is the increase in labor costs as you go from 2nd to 1st world status. But, you also get more old people, as a stable population is older than a growing one. (Each new person starts at age 0 vs. the average age thus reducing the average age.) The US population is growing but this is mostly due to migrants who are closer to the average age which reduces the effect of the influx of baby's would do to the population.
Anyway, old people tend to take more resources to care for than baby's so in many ways it's not the average age that's important but how many people are aging out of your work force vs. dieing vs. # of young people. It's easy to forget when dealing with this stuff, but economy's can change a lot faster than you might think. Their are still a lot of WWII vet's in the US and a lot of people who would have been alive but for WWII. Population trends tend to be a lot easer to predict over the next 20 years than just about anything else but it's hard to say what's going on long term.
However, I don't expect China to keep it's up 10% growth a year that's a doubling of the economy every 5 years which tends to produce HUGE pressures over longer time frames. Sit back and think what would happen if they started using rice that's 10% more efficient. It might sound like a good thing but it would make a lot of farms go broke. It takes time to deal with a shifting economy. Yes they have a lot of buffers, but Think what it would do if the average American could expect to make 16x what they do now in 20 years and 256x what they do now in 40. That would be a huge shift the way people think about most things.
I think "stage-assist' is worth a lot. But, you can also save a lot of energy by using wings to overcome the 1/g downward force for the first sage of the flight. At mach 22 you don't need to spend energy overcoming gravity but at low speeds you spend an amazing amount of energy overcoming 1g on your ship and ALL it's fuel. I think a winged mach 2 - 4 first stage(s) would be worth a lot. You also get to use smaller rocket engines on your main ship and less fuel and less structural mass, because they don't have to work in nearly as stressful conditions (Full fuel and Full 1g gravity.) saving you even more fuel and ship structural mass thus letting you use even smaller rockets or have more cargo.
I don't think we should aim for mach 10 air breathing anytime soon, but I think mach 2 - 4 could be worth a lot and the shuttle already does super sonic separations so this should work well. Also the less massive the ship the lower the reentry angle can be and thus the cooler the reentry (saving even more weight on heat shielding).
PS: By stages I mean you can drop the jet's and have the ship use the wing to overcome that 1g as it accelerates to a slightly higher mach. It's probably not worth the trouble but every little bit helps.
It's expensive because it's basically not reusable. Look into the % of cash spend on say fuel vs. the cost of the program. The reason why they are so costly is they don't do many flights and they keep redesigning the things. Drop the R&D budget and the cost to inspect them each time and they are going to look a lot better from a cost perspective. Granted they do need to be inspected each time but they are prototypes so comparing the first gen of semi reusable shuttle with a refined rocket system is silly.
... Fuel costs are a low % of the total cost of each launch. So optimizing things to reduce fuel costs is almost a waste of time.
The goal was to build something so you could just refuel it each time you want to send it up thus saving a lot of $ but a large % of the ship is not reusable and they have to inspect / disassemble the rest of the thing each flight which is why it's so expensive. They should have build a ship that can do low temp reentry and can do horizontal takeoff and landing not some sort of rocket where you have to rebuild build 90% of it for each launch.
Thanks for the info I had not looked into HDD in a while and I was still thinking they where at 35MB/s range under ideal situations and 20MB/s on a fragmented disk. I am going to test that array tonight and see how fast it is. I don't think the cheep raid cards are slow because of programmers or some such a 4 disks RAID 5 that's saving 3 x 60 MB/s should only need a 32-bit chip at 45 MHz to keep up. (150 / 32 *8 = 45)
My guess is it's the PCI interface that's slowing things down. Granted they probably have shitty firm where and drivers but I don't see that it's that hard vs. say building a video card.
PS: Your right on read speeds. RAID 1 is 1/2 the space Drives/2 in speed on writes but for read it can get to Drives * Drive speed. But so can most arrays. Can't think any systems that do this, but you can read from all disks at the same time on a RAID 5 array you need to XOR some but look at it this way:
Disk 4 is XOR of DISK 1 - 3 so if you read from disk 4 and disk 1 and 2 you can XOR to find out what disk 3 had but you just read what disk 1 and 2 had so now you know what disk 1-3 have for that segment. Now you can get disk 3 to read something else. Thus you can get full read speed from all disks if you're doing a long sequential read. With a little optimization you just rotate which disk you want to send off and do it's own thing and you can get # Disks * Disk speed for reads. (IF you want to know what ALL the information in that segment if it's a more random read pattern it's just # Disks - 1 * Disk speed but that's still not bad.) On the other hand RAID 5 sucks for non-sequential writes. But the guy is doing a sequential write so it still is his best option IMO.
No. By introducing fishing your making a more difficult environment for the species to survive in. Humans have hunted a lot of species to extinction and it's not about weather they can adapt to us so much as can they deal with us and the rest of their environment because it may be a lot harder to be a small fish in the ocean that does not have to worry about man than it was to be a large fish before we showed up.
Play Alien vs. Predator at night in a dark room as an alien with a good surround sound system at high volume. It's not a constant high for 6 hours but you can get 30 min or so of extreme adrenalin from doing this and a lot of fun.
VS.
1. Pack your bag.
2. Get into plain. (X travel time to Airport.)
3. Get up to altitude and over the drop site.
4. Jump out Fall for ~120 seconds at high speed with the wind rushing by your head...
6. Land.
7. Pack your bag.
8. Travel back to the airport, wait for plain to land get... repeat.
7. Drive home at end of day.
Ok yea 4 is realy fun but you get about 4 jumps on a good day where as gaming can be a near constant high. The trick is playing "hard" games with a good system and don't save.
Ok well how many of them have planets that could support life? I am going to guess 1 in 100,000.
So even if the odds where not good you get to roll those dice 5 * 10 ^ 17 times.
Just to give you an idea how evolution produces complexity: Their are programmable CPU's where you get to change what gates operate at will. Now someone decided to try and evolve something that could tell a 5Mhz signal from a 50Mhz signal with one of these. He ended up with a device that worked on that device but not anything else. It turns out he evolved something that used the specific makeup of that chip to induce a current on another part of the chip which was not working across chips. Now this is not something he had ever thought and it was really complex behavior but it showed up fast because undirected evolution will try anything.
The basic idea of evolution is you start from almost nothing a cell that can reproduce in a world without disease or predators and you will end up with complex life. This has been shown to work though direct experiments. Evolution produces complexity. It works by adding hacks on top of hacks such as the human tail which is tiny in most people because losing abilities happen fast in evolution but only if they are harmful. And the tiny amount of bone in that tail is not really harmful so we keep it. As an ID person why do we still have some DNA that makes gills? I mean really there is not point to it so a good designer would have just skipped over it right?
PS: Life does not need DNA, mitochondria, or even a cell wall. All it really needs is a few tiny bits of RNA. Life is the ability to eat and reproduce and as such it can work with vary simple origins.
I said "Japan and China both have rapidly aging populations." Looking closer I don't expect Japan to keep geting much older for much longer but they are still geting older right now.
Let's look at some other numbers so we can get an idea of the rate of population change: US- Population growth rate: 0.92% (2005 est.) Net migration rate: 3.31 migrant(s)/1,000 population (2005 est.) Median age: total: 36.27 years male: 34.94 years female: 37.6 years (2005 est.)
Japan- Population growth rate: 0.05% (2005 est.) Net migration rate: 0 migrant(s)/1,000 population (2005 est.) Life expectancy at birth: total population: 81.15 years male: 77.86 years female: 84.61 years (2005 est.) Median age: total: 42.64 years (Wow they are OLD!) male: 40.87 years female: 44.44 years (2005 est.)
China: Population growth rate: 0.58% (2005 est.) Net migration rate: -0.4 migrant(s)/1,000 population (2005 est.)
Median age: total: 32.26 years male: 31.87 years female: 32.67 years (2005 est.)
Life expectancy at birth: total population: 72.27 years male: 70.65 years female: 74.09 years (2005 est.)
Ok, I am going to have to look into Japan more because I don't expect their population can get much older. Anyway, China is a young country right but their is nothing keeping it that way.
I said "Japan and China both have rapidly aging populations." Looking closer I don't expect Japan to keep geting much older for much longer but they are still geting older right now.
Age vs Delta Age
Let's look at some other numbers so we can get an idea of the rate of population change:
US-
Population growth rate: 0.92% (2005 est.)
Net migration rate: 3.31 migrant(s)/1,000 population (2005 est.)
Median age:
total: 36.27 years
male: 34.94 years
female: 37.6 years (2005 est.)
Japan-
Population growth rate: 0.05% (2005 est.)
Net migration rate: 0 migrant(s)/1,000 population (2005 est.)
Life expectancy at birth:
total population: 81.15 years
male: 77.86 years
female: 84.61 years (2005 est.)
Median age:
total: 42.64 years (Wow they are OLD!)
male: 40.87 years
female: 44.44 years (2005 est.)
China:
Population growth rate: 0.58% (2005 est.)
Net migration rate: -0.4 migrant(s)/1,000 population (2005 est.)
Median age:
total: 32.26 years
male: 31.87 years
female: 32.67 years (2005 est.)
Life expectancy at birth:
total population: 72.27 years
male: 70.65 years
female: 74.09 years (2005 est.)
Ok, I am going to have to look into Japan more because I don't expect their population can get much older. Anyway, China is a young country right but their is nothing keeping it that way.
There is a difference between being willing to do something and wanting to do something. The choice to "Shoot someone or Die" is vary different from "Actuality stealing a car vs. Pretending to steel a car." I have no problem with killing someone with an adequate reason, but I have no desire to go out and shoot someone for the fun of it.
I have been close to death before in real life, but honestly the adrenalin rush from playing video games is a much better high. They are designed to get your adrenalin pumping and they are much better at it than say skydiving. Skydiving may be really fun but it's not fun for vary long and you spend a lot of time and money waiting to have fun. It's the same reason why I don't really go to amusement parks they are fun but video games are much more fun.
You can read from a RAID 5 as fast as you can from a RAID 0 (You only need to do the XOR on a read when one disk is bad.), but RAID 1 has no preformance benifts.
I like RAID 10/01 (RAID 0 of RAID 1 ) with it's 66% chance to servive the lost of 2 disks but it's a little costly and overkill for what their doing. IMO.
PS: I never realy tested the drive I think the cheep controwler is limiting my write speed but but It can write a 250MB file fast which is all I realy care about. ( I need more space than speed.) Anyway, what disk can sustain more than 50MB/s? I guess some of those 15k RPM drives might be close to that but it seems a little fast for cheep 7k RPM drives.
Umm, so far we have lost more troops "after the war was over" than we did in over toppling his government. Bush could have killed every man woman and child within 30 min of taking office with a big old pile of nukes, but that's not really a good idea either. It's a complex issue and we got a little international support but overall it's hardly a success. Sure "We Won" but is the country stable? Do we still need to support them? What are we getting from all this money and all these lives? I am not just talking about deaths but also people living away from friends and families. If you want to do this for humanitarian reasons there are many places in the world that are much worse off but hey lets over though Iraq and ignore Afghanistan...
Now in the same way we could build a few 100 pebble bed reactors but that does not mean we are going to deal with the long term issues well. I would like to see breeder reactors in the US but I don't see that happening either.
PS: Personally I think Bush has little real control over these issues, but I am explaining why they think it's a bad idea not what I personally feel.
China is a lot less centralized than you might suppose. They do a tight grip on their economy but it's though policy's like "If you have an American company willing to buy your product you can get the financing to build your plant."
PS: Something like 1/2 of the US economy is directly under local state or federal control and we seem to do ok.
Long-term China's growth is going to slow down. Right now it's using predatory monetary policy to fuel rapid economic growth but as Japan learned you can only feed off other nations for so long before your internal system starts to collapse. Japan and China both have rapidly aging populations. Europe's system is practically stagnant. Honestly, Brazil and India look to be the biggest players in 50 years IMO.
America has a tradition of innovation, a stable population, a low population density, huge amounts of capital, a steady influx of immigrants, and a devise society. We also have an insane prison population, high levels of drug use, a week SS program ECT. I don't think we will still have 2x the economy of biggest competitors in 50 years but I think we are in good long-term shape.
PS: Canada and Australia will also become more significant players on the world stage, but I don't see them having the levels of economic growth to catch up with the US in the next 50 years.
It's not that they feel Bush is going to send it to terrorists but they feel Bush is not going to deal with the issues of public safety in a reasonable fashion.
Do you really think bush is going to develop a plan to safely build and manage power plants AND safely store the waste? It can be done, but many people feels Bush is incapable of running a 7-11 let alone deal with public safety issues on this magnitude. Look at how we have managed the Iraq war and think how well he would deal with other issues of similar complexity.
I don't think Bush is all that evil he mostly incompetent with just a dash of evil. Don't forget Hitler was beloved by his country and times man of the year well before people thought of him as a raving lunatic.
About 67 percent of the energy required to make ethanol is consumed in fermenting and distilling corn. As a result, ethanol production creates 1.1 units of energy for every unit of energy consumed. In the UW-Madison process, the desired alkanes spontaneously separate from water. No additional heating or distillation is required. The result is the creation of 2.2 units of energy for every unit of energy consumed in energy production.
Ok first off it was my understanding that corn was not an ideal plant for ethanol production but what part of the fermentation / distillation process uses energy? If they are just looking for low-grade heat then there are many sources that are currently going to waste.
I am more a CS nerd, but I have been looking into thermo dynamics of energy generation lately and it looks like most power plants ignore the value of any heat under 400deg F right now so a little stream lining could make this worthwhile.
This sounds like a software issue but if you think it is the HDD try a Raid 5 system with 3 or 4 disks. If your still willing to look into this stuff try pick up a cheep RAD controller for ~100$ or and try 3 or 4 disks in an array. Your storage space should be (Number of disks - 1) * size of smallest disk so even if it does not help out on the speed issue you just added a lot of storage space for fairly cheep.
PS: If you buy them from someplace with a good return policy then should be able to take them back if it does not fix your problem. So it's a low risk weekend thing.
You can't really guess the odds from that data. I would say odds around 1.5% of failure +/- 1% on this launch are reasonable. It should be safer than the other launches as both failures have been addressed. They keep changing the design over time so in some ways it's getting less safe but the odds on this launch have little to do with the failures of a shuttles with of a different design.
PS: It might look the same but the shuttle has gone though significant changes over it's lifetime.
Slashdot Mirror
Don't treat drivers difrently than any other program.
There is no "root".
Nothing can alter any system files. Outside of athenticated updates to the OS.
No process family can use more than 90% of system resorces.
The only process than can alter an executible file is one spawned by that process.
Drivers are treated as any other process and have no special writes or privliges.
All process are limited to their own memory space and a messaging system to comunicate with other programs and the OS.
That's a good start you need to add a lot of varification above this so you can handel corrupted memory gracefully.
PS: The closest thing to a real OS most people use is the JAVA VM.
If an OS can crash because of software then it has a basic design flaw. If an OS can get a virus then it has a basic design flaw. The only thing that should cause an OS to crash is severely corrupted memory and or CPU. I have worked with software that can function as the system RAM is being actively corrupted. Few people want to pay for this level of software but you can design an OS that will still run if you randomly rip out ram chip but hey let's blame it on the l33t hackers and say it's the software's fault.
Sorry by "every little bit helps" I meant incremental design changes can take a basic design from horribly expensive to reasonable cost. Right now we get people into space at around 7 / 600mil = 85mil a person. I think a system that drops that down to 20mil would be a huge savings AND a reasonable goal. Now the simplest way to do this is build a ship that is 1/4 as large and I expect them to do that but they are many other improvements that would be useful. One of the largest costs in the project is the amount of inspection each peace needs to be put though so either reducing the number of pieces OR reducing the stresses those pieces are under would reduce the costs. That's the "every little bit helps" that I am talking about.
The amount of care a car went though over it's first 100k miles was a lot higher 20 years ago than it is today AND cars are more complex today AND cars get better gas mileage AND cars have more powerful engines. The complexity is a sacrifice to give you more power and mileage but it's reasonable because of the huge reduction in overall cost. Now I think we could do the same thing for the next gen shuttle. Yes, complexity is a bad thing, but it can be a useful sacrifice if it gives you a lower overall cost.
A 32bit PCI bus at 33 MHz is only has a "theoretical" bandwidth of 127.2MB/s or a little over what 2 drives should do in a RAID 0. http://www.pcguide.com/ref/mbsys/buses/funcBandwid th-c.html depending on the Mother Board you may need to share with the network card and the sound card and everything else.
So, you have to read from all four disks in a four-disk array. You read from three to get the data, read from the fourth to get the parity bit, then calculate the parity to verify that your read was valid. Ok think about what your saying if you need all 4 disks then the array would stop working if one disk went bad. Now it might be a good idea to do what your saying IF you don't trust the system to detect if a disk goes bad, but you did not talk about doing this with the RAID 10 setup so either you accept the slight chance of a read error and get to use all disks independently on a read or you don't get to do this for any array.
PS: Once again I am suggesting using 2 disks + the parity disk to read sequential data and then have the 3rd disk read some other data. With a good buffer you can rotate which disk is doing the independent read and get the full sequential read speed of all 4 disks over time.
When looking at Japan and China the average age is 10 years apart and the average lifespan is 10 years apart BUT if the average person lives to be 10 years older then the average age should be 5 years higher not 10. China has a large % of their younger population leaving each year which is helping to keep their numbers low (each migrant acts as a death.) but as their economy improves more of these people will stay increasing the average age. Anyway, the point is like the US baby boom population trends will alter their economic situation.
A classic example is the increase in labor costs as you go from 2nd to 1st world status. But, you also get more old people, as a stable population is older than a growing one. (Each new person starts at age 0 vs. the average age thus reducing the average age.) The US population is growing but this is mostly due to migrants who are closer to the average age which reduces the effect of the influx of baby's would do to the population.
Anyway, old people tend to take more resources to care for than baby's so in many ways it's not the average age that's important but how many people are aging out of your work force vs. dieing vs. # of young people. It's easy to forget when dealing with this stuff, but economy's can change a lot faster than you might think. Their are still a lot of WWII vet's in the US and a lot of people who would have been alive but for WWII. Population trends tend to be a lot easer to predict over the next 20 years than just about anything else but it's hard to say what's going on long term.
However, I don't expect China to keep it's up 10% growth a year that's a doubling of the economy every 5 years which tends to produce HUGE pressures over longer time frames. Sit back and think what would happen if they started using rice that's 10% more efficient. It might sound like a good thing but it would make a lot of farms go broke. It takes time to deal with a shifting economy. Yes they have a lot of buffers, but Think what it would do if the average American could expect to make 16x what they do now in 20 years and 256x what they do now in 40. That would be a huge shift the way people think about most things.
I think "stage-assist' is worth a lot. But, you can also save a lot of energy by using wings to overcome the 1/g downward force for the first sage of the flight. At mach 22 you don't need to spend energy overcoming gravity but at low speeds you spend an amazing amount of energy overcoming 1g on your ship and ALL it's fuel. I think a winged mach 2 - 4 first stage(s) would be worth a lot. You also get to use smaller rocket engines on your main ship and less fuel and less structural mass, because they don't have to work in nearly as stressful conditions (Full fuel and Full 1g gravity.) saving you even more fuel and ship structural mass thus letting you use even smaller rockets or have more cargo.
I don't think we should aim for mach 10 air breathing anytime soon, but I think mach 2 - 4 could be worth a lot and the shuttle already does super sonic separations so this should work well. Also the less massive the ship the lower the reentry angle can be and thus the cooler the reentry (saving even more weight on heat shielding).
PS: By stages I mean you can drop the jet's and have the ship use the wing to overcome that 1g as it accelerates to a slightly higher mach. It's probably not worth the trouble but every little bit helps.
It's expensive because it's basically not reusable. Look into the % of cash spend on say fuel vs. the cost of the program. The reason why they are so costly is they don't do many flights and they keep redesigning the things. Drop the R&D budget and the cost to inspect them each time and they are going to look a lot better from a cost perspective. Granted they do need to be inspected each time but they are prototypes so comparing the first gen of semi reusable shuttle with a refined rocket system is silly.
... Fuel costs are a low % of the total cost of each launch. So optimizing things to reduce fuel costs is almost a waste of time.
The goal was to build something so you could just refuel it each time you want to send it up thus saving a lot of $ but a large % of the ship is not reusable and they have to inspect / disassemble the rest of the thing each flight which is why it's so expensive. They should have build a ship that can do low temp reentry and can do horizontal takeoff and landing not some sort of rocket where you have to rebuild build 90% of it for each launch.
Thanks for the info I had not looked into HDD in a while and I was still thinking they where at 35MB/s range under ideal situations and 20MB/s on a fragmented disk. I am going to test that array tonight and see how fast it is. I don't think the cheep raid cards are slow because of programmers or some such a 4 disks RAID 5 that's saving 3 x 60 MB/s should only need a 32-bit chip at 45 MHz to keep up. (150 / 32 *8 = 45)
/2 in speed on writes but for read it can get to Drives * Drive speed. But so can most arrays. Can't think any systems that do this, but you can read from all disks at the same time on a RAID 5 array you need to XOR some but look at it this way:
My guess is it's the PCI interface that's slowing things down. Granted they probably have shitty firm where and drivers but I don't see that it's that hard vs. say building a video card.
PS: Your right on read speeds. RAID 1 is 1/2 the space Drives
Disk 4 is XOR of DISK 1 - 3 so if you read from disk 4 and disk 1 and 2 you can XOR to find out what disk 3 had but you just read what disk 1 and 2 had so now you know what disk 1-3 have for that segment. Now you can get disk 3 to read something else. Thus you can get full read speed from all disks if you're doing a long sequential read. With a little optimization you just rotate which disk you want to send off and do it's own thing and you can get # Disks * Disk speed for reads. (IF you want to know what ALL the information in that segment if it's a more random read pattern it's just # Disks - 1 * Disk speed but that's still not bad.) On the other hand RAID 5 sucks for non-sequential writes. But the guy is doing a sequential write so it still is his best option IMO.
No. By introducing fishing your making a more difficult environment for the species to survive in. Humans have hunted a lot of species to extinction and it's not about weather they can adapt to us so much as can they deal with us and the rest of their environment because it may be a lot harder to be a small fish in the ocean that does not have to worry about man than it was to be a large fish before we showed up.
Play Alien vs. Predator at night in a dark room as an alien with a good surround sound system at high volume. It's not a constant high for 6 hours but you can get 30 min or so of extreme adrenalin from doing this and a lot of fun.
VS.
1. Pack your bag.
2. Get into plain. (X travel time to Airport.)
3. Get up to altitude and over the drop site.
4. Jump out Fall for ~120 seconds at high speed with the
wind rushing by your head...
6. Land. 7. Pack your bag. 8. Travel back to the airport, wait for plain to land get... repeat.
7. Drive home at end of day.
Ok yea 4 is realy fun but you get about 4 jumps on a good day where as gaming can be a near constant high. The trick is playing "hard" games with a good system and don't save.
Stop thinking what are the odds it would happen on earth and start thinking what are the odds of it happening at all.
h tml)
How Many Stars Are There? ~ 5 x 10 ^ 22 (http://pages.prodigy.net/jhonig/bignum/quniver3.
Ok well how many of them have planets that could support life? I am going to guess 1 in 100,000.
So even if the odds where not good you get to roll those dice 5 * 10 ^ 17 times.
Just to give you an idea how evolution produces complexity: Their are programmable CPU's where you get to change what gates operate at will. Now someone decided to try and evolve something that could tell a 5Mhz signal from a 50Mhz signal with one of these. He ended up with a device that worked on that device but not anything else. It turns out he evolved something that used the specific makeup of that chip to induce a current on another part of the chip which was not working across chips. Now this is not something he had ever thought and it was really complex behavior but it showed up fast because undirected evolution will try anything.
The basic idea of evolution is you start from almost nothing a cell that can reproduce in a world without disease or predators and you will end up with complex life. This has been shown to work though direct experiments. Evolution produces complexity. It works by adding hacks on top of hacks such as the human tail which is tiny in most people because losing abilities happen fast in evolution but only if they are harmful. And the tiny amount of bone in that tail is not really harmful so we keep it. As an ID person why do we still have some DNA that makes gills? I mean really there is not point to it so a good designer would have just skipped over it right?
PS: Life does not need DNA, mitochondria, or even a cell wall. All it really needs is a few tiny bits of RNA. Life is the ability to eat and reproduce and as such it can work with vary simple origins.
I said "Japan and China both have rapidly aging populations." Looking closer I don't expect Japan to keep geting much older for much longer but they are still geting older right now.
Let's look at some other numbers so we can get an idea of the rate of population change:
US-
Population growth rate: 0.92% (2005 est.)
Net migration rate: 3.31 migrant(s)/1,000 population (2005 est.)
Median age:
total: 36.27 years
male: 34.94 years
female: 37.6 years (2005 est.)
Japan-
Population growth rate: 0.05% (2005 est.)
Net migration rate: 0 migrant(s)/1,000 population (2005 est.)
Life expectancy at birth:
total population: 81.15 years
male: 77.86 years
female: 84.61 years (2005 est.)
Median age:
total: 42.64 years (Wow they are OLD!)
male: 40.87 years
female: 44.44 years (2005 est.)
China:
Population growth rate: 0.58% (2005 est.)
Net migration rate: -0.4 migrant(s)/1,000 population (2005 est.)
Median age:
total: 32.26 years
male: 31.87 years
female: 32.67 years (2005 est.)
Life expectancy at birth:
total population: 72.27 years
male: 70.65 years
female: 74.09 years (2005 est.)
Ok, I am going to have to look into Japan more because I don't expect their population can get much older. Anyway, China is a young country right but their is nothing keeping it that way.
I said "Japan and China both have rapidly aging populations." Looking closer I don't expect Japan to keep geting much older for much longer but they are still geting older right now. Age vs Delta Age Let's look at some other numbers so we can get an idea of the rate of population change: US- Population growth rate: 0.92% (2005 est.) Net migration rate: 3.31 migrant(s)/1,000 population (2005 est.) Median age: total: 36.27 years male: 34.94 years female: 37.6 years (2005 est.) Japan- Population growth rate: 0.05% (2005 est.) Net migration rate: 0 migrant(s)/1,000 population (2005 est.) Life expectancy at birth: total population: 81.15 years male: 77.86 years female: 84.61 years (2005 est.) Median age: total: 42.64 years (Wow they are OLD!) male: 40.87 years female: 44.44 years (2005 est.) China: Population growth rate: 0.58% (2005 est.) Net migration rate: -0.4 migrant(s)/1,000 population (2005 est.) Median age: total: 32.26 years male: 31.87 years female: 32.67 years (2005 est.) Life expectancy at birth: total population: 72.27 years male: 70.65 years female: 74.09 years (2005 est.) Ok, I am going to have to look into Japan more because I don't expect their population can get much older. Anyway, China is a young country right but their is nothing keeping it that way.
Ok, drop 95% of military spending and I will give up NASA.
There is a difference between being willing to do something and wanting to do something. The choice to "Shoot someone or Die" is vary different from "Actuality stealing a car vs. Pretending to steel a car." I have no problem with killing someone with an adequate reason, but I have no desire to go out and shoot someone for the fun of it.
I have been close to death before in real life, but honestly the adrenalin rush from playing video games is a much better high. They are designed to get your adrenalin pumping and they are much better at it than say skydiving. Skydiving may be really fun but it's not fun for vary long and you spend a lot of time and money waiting to have fun. It's the same reason why I don't really go to amusement parks they are fun but video games are much more fun.
I lose way to many drives to trust RAID O.
You can read from a RAID 5 as fast as you can from a RAID 0 (You only need to do the XOR on a read when one disk is bad.), but RAID 1 has no preformance benifts.
I like RAID 10/01 (RAID 0 of RAID 1 ) with it's 66% chance to servive the lost of 2 disks but it's a little costly and overkill for what their doing. IMO.
PS: I never realy tested the drive I think the cheep controwler is limiting my write speed but but It can write a 250MB file fast which is all I realy care about. ( I need more space than speed.) Anyway, what disk can sustain more than 50MB/s? I guess some of those 15k RPM drives might be close to that but it seems a little fast for cheep 7k RPM drives.
Umm, so far we have lost more troops "after the war was over" than we did in over toppling his government. Bush could have killed every man woman and child within 30 min of taking office with a big old pile of nukes, but that's not really a good idea either. It's a complex issue and we got a little international support but overall it's hardly a success. Sure "We Won" but is the country stable? Do we still need to support them? What are we getting from all this money and all these lives? I am not just talking about deaths but also people living away from friends and families. If you want to do this for humanitarian reasons there are many places in the world that are much worse off but hey lets over though Iraq and ignore Afghanistan...
Now in the same way we could build a few 100 pebble bed reactors but that does not mean we are going to deal with the long term issues well. I would like to see breeder reactors in the US but I don't see that happening either.
PS: Personally I think Bush has little real control over these issues, but I am explaining why they think it's a bad idea not what I personally feel.
China is a lot less centralized than you might suppose. They do a tight grip on their economy but it's though policy's like "If you have an American company willing to buy your product you can get the financing to build your plant."
PS: Something like 1/2 of the US economy is directly under local state or federal control and we seem to do ok.
Long-term China's growth is going to slow down. Right now it's using predatory monetary policy to fuel rapid economic growth but as Japan learned you can only feed off other nations for so long before your internal system starts to collapse. Japan and China both have rapidly aging populations. Europe's system is practically stagnant. Honestly, Brazil and India look to be the biggest players in 50 years IMO.
America has a tradition of innovation, a stable population, a low population density, huge amounts of capital, a steady influx of immigrants, and a devise society. We also have an insane prison population, high levels of drug use, a week SS program ECT. I don't think we will still have 2x the economy of biggest competitors in 50 years but I think we are in good long-term shape.
PS: Canada and Australia will also become more significant players on the world stage, but I don't see them having the levels of economic growth to catch up with the US in the next 50 years.
It's not that they feel Bush is going to send it to terrorists but they feel Bush is not going to deal with the issues of public safety in a reasonable fashion.
Do you really think bush is going to develop a plan to safely build and manage power plants AND safely store the waste? It can be done, but many people feels Bush is incapable of running a 7-11 let alone deal with public safety issues on this magnitude. Look at how we have managed the Iraq war and think how well he would deal with other issues of similar complexity.
I don't think Bush is all that evil he mostly incompetent with just a dash of evil. Don't forget Hitler was beloved by his country and times man of the year well before people thought of him as a raving lunatic.
About 67 percent of the energy required to make ethanol is consumed in fermenting and distilling corn. As a result, ethanol production creates 1.1 units of energy for every unit of energy consumed. In the UW-Madison process, the desired alkanes spontaneously separate from water. No additional heating or distillation is required. The result is the creation of 2.2 units of energy for every unit of energy consumed in energy production.
Ok first off it was my understanding that corn was not an ideal plant for ethanol production but what part of the fermentation / distillation process uses energy? If they are just looking for low-grade heat then there are many sources that are currently going to waste.
I am more a CS nerd, but I have been looking into thermo dynamics of energy generation lately and it looks like most power plants ignore the value of any heat under 400deg F right now so a little stream lining could make this worthwhile.
This sounds like a software issue but if you think it is the HDD try a Raid 5 system with 3 or 4 disks. If your still willing to look into this stuff try pick up a cheep RAD controller for ~100$ or and try 3 or 4 disks in an array. Your storage space should be (Number of disks - 1) * size of smallest disk so even if it does not help out on the speed issue you just added a lot of storage space for fairly cheep.
PS: If you buy them from someplace with a good return policy then should be able to take them back if it does not fix your problem. So it's a low risk weekend thing.
You can't really guess the odds from that data. I would say odds around 1.5% of failure +/- 1% on this launch are reasonable. It should be safer than the other launches as both failures have been addressed. They keep changing the design over time so in some ways it's getting less safe but the odds on this launch have little to do with the failures of a shuttles with of a different design.
PS: It might look the same but the shuttle has gone though significant changes over it's lifetime.