The link to the Quicktime movie showing how dusty the planet is is wrong. In fact, the movie is mpeg and you have to click on the "+ Full caption/ high resolution image" link to get to it.
Looking at the pictures or the animation of the eroding polar pits, I found it almost impossible not to see them as expanding mounds. I had to rotate the gif image 180 degrees to make my view match the comments.
It looks to me like that might be older gullies that have been filled in by dust. In particular, the upper part of the top gully seems to have carved a different channel than the old one. We already knew there were gullies, I think this is good evidence of some activity since the first picture was taken.
And thank you for a post not about global warming.
By ordinary wire I mean not superconducting. Silver, copper and aluminum are not nearly good enough, and any of those is much better than any carbon based conductors developed so far. Room temperature superconductors might be good enough, but I wouldn't count on them being developed anytime soon. The practical range for electrical transmission by wire is only a few hundred miles, transmission losses should be well over 99% at the midpoint of an elevator. A possible loss of 90% in beaming power looks attractive in comparison.
The only other serious idea I've seen for powering an elevator car is a light weight nuclear reactor.
There has been no demonstration of any technology able to power a space elevator car, but it's still thought to be an easier problem than building the cable.
After writing all this, I checked Wikipedia. The only other idea there was that if there was two way traffic on one cable the down cars could mostly power the up cars. Two way traffic is generally thought to be too difficult, and it can only be a partial solution anyhow.
Unfortunately you can't send power over ordinary wires for thousands of miles up a tether to power your climber. There's either too much resistance or your wire weighs too much. The most popular idea seems to be to beam the power to the climber, perhaps with infrared lasers. By using the right frequency, infrared light can be turned into electricity much more efficiently than sunlight can.
I agree with your sentiments, but the 5.5 number from the article was grams of CO per mile, not anything to do with CO2. Not that it matters here, but there is much less than 5.5% CO2 in the atmosphere. It is under 400 ppm, or 0.04%.
I enjoyed reading the article. I laughed out loud at the 97% efficiency claim, and was amused throughout by how many people seem to have been suckered by this.
It's true that comets are not meteors, but your comment makes it sound like you don't know what a meteor is. A meteor is the streak of light you see when a small object passes through the atmosphere. That object (by definition a meteoroid) could be a piece of a comet or an asteroid.
Many people here seem to be trying to avoid admitting that a lot of that markup actually becomes profit for Intel. Intel is a very profitable company, and their stock price reflects that. Their main competition, AMD, has until recently had trouble making any profit at all while selling for only slightly less than Intel. As long as the competition can't successfully undercut Intel's prices, they will keep charging what the market will bear.
Manufactured diamonds are real diamonds, so they have the same refractive index, and density, as natural diamonds. The more usual term for them is synthetic diamonds, and they can be distinguished by their trace elements and by the nature of inclusions (flaws). For instance, high pressure synthetic diamonds have iron inclusions that are not found in natural diamonds.
It is an open question whether the new vapor deposition diamonds will continue to be identified, though for now they can.
But you can be CONVICTED of libel for telling the truth if the court believes it is untrue. If you make a defamatory statement about someone you better have convincing evidence that it true, and not just from your own personal knowledge.
You appear to have given some thought to this, so let me ask you why you think Bell's Inequality doesn't hold. Do you think there is something wrong with the underlying theory, or do you think that the experimental tests aren't conclusive?
I use ICEOWS, and like it. My brother has stopped using it since he says that corrupted RAR files can crash his XP system. He seems get a lot of corrupted RAR files from news groups.
As far as I can tell, ICEOWS is free but closed source. It's been quite a while since its last modification.
I think it is more likely that life on Earth originated on Mars that the other way around. Mars cooled faster, and it's easier for ejecta to get from Mars to Earth. Either way, life that has evolved separately for such a long time would be very important scientifically.
http://www.storagereview.com/ is now trying to put reliability data in their reviews. Not sure how well it works, but it at least seems better than nothing. They have not reviewed this drive yet, but you can check out how some recent drives from all the major manufacturers are doing.
True. The circumstances feel like punishment to me, especially the one year duration. If it was just to avoid a news site they thought was unfair I would expect it to last indefinitely.
They could have printed the guy's home address, or telephone number or a lot of other data that would be awkward to have shoved into the public's face. How much information about a public figure can be published without being irresponsible is a judgment call, and in my judgment CNET stopped well short of bad journalism. You may disagree, but perhaps you could specify which of the items mentioned by CNET you think was so evil to publicize, and what is so bad about it.
It wouldn't be very useful to punish CNET for something unless you let them know what they did wrong. Google should have, and probably did, tell them why they were banned.
Fixed focus lenses will generally get you higher quality pictures, the problem is hauling around a lot of them to get a decent amount of shooting options. You could probably find a lens that allows manual zooming without a battery if that's a problem.
Slashdot Mirror
I looked it up in the Firefox help and it's reload (ignore cache). I've never used it before, and I wonder why it works too.
The link to the Quicktime movie showing how dusty the planet is is wrong. In fact, the movie is mpeg and you have to click on the "+ Full caption/ high resolution image" link to get to it.
Looking at the pictures or the animation of the eroding polar pits, I found it almost impossible not to see them as expanding mounds. I had to rotate the gif image 180 degrees to make my view match the comments.
It looks to me like that might be older gullies that have been filled in by dust. In particular, the upper part of the top gully seems to have carved a different channel than the old one. We already knew there were gullies, I think this is good evidence of some activity since the first picture was taken.
And thank you for a post not about global warming.
By ordinary wire I mean not superconducting. Silver, copper and aluminum are not nearly good enough, and any of those is much better than any carbon based conductors developed so far. Room temperature superconductors might be good enough, but I wouldn't count on them being developed anytime soon. The practical range for electrical transmission by wire is only a few hundred miles, transmission losses should be well over 99% at the midpoint of an elevator. A possible loss of 90% in beaming power looks attractive in comparison.
The only other serious idea I've seen for powering an elevator car is a light weight nuclear reactor.
There has been no demonstration of any technology able to power a space elevator car, but it's still thought to be an easier problem than building the cable.
After writing all this, I checked Wikipedia. The only other idea there was that if there was two way traffic on one cable the down cars could mostly power the up cars. Two way traffic is generally thought to be too difficult, and it can only be a partial solution anyhow.
Unfortunately you can't send power over ordinary wires for thousands of miles up a tether to power your climber. There's either too much resistance or your wire weighs too much. The most popular idea seems to be to beam the power to the climber, perhaps with infrared lasers. By using the right frequency, infrared light can be turned into electricity much more efficiently than sunlight can.
I agree with your sentiments, but the 5.5 number from the article was grams of CO per mile, not anything to do with CO2. Not that it matters here, but there is much less than 5.5% CO2 in the atmosphere. It is under 400 ppm, or 0.04%.
I enjoyed reading the article. I laughed out loud at the 97% efficiency claim, and was amused throughout by how many people seem to have been suckered by this.
It's true that comets are not meteors, but your comment makes it sound like you don't know what a meteor is. A meteor is the streak of light you see when a small object passes through the atmosphere. That object (by definition a meteoroid) could be a piece of a comet or an asteroid.
Good, the profit margin was just what was needed to understand what the other numbers really meant.
I didn't mean to sound critical of Intel for making a profit: That's what companies are supposed to do.
Many people here seem to be trying to avoid admitting that a lot of that markup actually becomes profit for Intel. Intel is a very profitable company, and their stock price reflects that. Their main competition, AMD, has until recently had trouble making any profit at all while selling for only slightly less than Intel. As long as the competition can't successfully undercut Intel's prices, they will keep charging what the market will bear.
Sounds like the Slashdot main page got hacked, adding this artcle with a link to harvest Slashdot logins. B-)
Don't forget the iAPX432 from 1981, their earlier huge failure.
Manufactured diamonds are real diamonds, so they have the same refractive index, and density, as natural diamonds. The more usual term for them is synthetic diamonds, and they can be distinguished by their trace elements and by the nature of inclusions (flaws). For instance, high pressure synthetic diamonds have iron inclusions that are not found in natural diamonds.
It is an open question whether the new vapor deposition diamonds will continue to be identified, though for now they can.
But you can be CONVICTED of libel for telling the truth if the court believes it is untrue. If you make a defamatory statement about someone you better have convincing evidence that it true, and not just from your own personal knowledge.
You appear to have given some thought to this, so let me ask you why you think Bell's Inequality doesn't hold. Do you think there is something wrong with the underlying theory, or do you think that the experimental tests aren't conclusive?
I use ICEOWS, and like it. My brother has stopped using it since he says that corrupted RAR files can crash his XP system. He seems get a lot of corrupted RAR files from news groups.
As far as I can tell, ICEOWS is free but closed source. It's been quite a while since its last modification.
Ah, I can't wait until I can start looking down on those n00b 7 digit UID Slashdotters!
I think it is more likely that life on Earth originated on Mars that the other way around. Mars cooled faster, and it's easier for ejecta to get from Mars to Earth. Either way, life that has evolved separately for such a long time would be very important scientifically.
http://www.storagereview.com/ is now trying to put reliability data in their reviews. Not sure how well it works, but it at least seems better than nothing. They have not reviewed this drive yet, but you can check out how some recent drives from all the major manufacturers are doing.
"You are assuming punishment."
True. The circumstances feel like punishment to me, especially the one year duration. If it was just to avoid a news site they thought was unfair I would expect it to last indefinitely.
But I could be wrong.
CNET did show responsibility.
They could have printed the guy's home address, or telephone number or a lot of other data that would be awkward to have shoved into the public's face. How much information about a public figure can be published without being irresponsible is a judgment call, and in my judgment CNET stopped well short of bad journalism. You may disagree, but perhaps you could specify which of the items mentioned by CNET you think was so evil to publicize, and what is so bad about it.
It wouldn't be very useful to punish CNET for something unless you let them know what they did wrong. Google should have, and probably did, tell them why they were banned.
Fixed focus lenses will generally get you higher quality pictures, the problem is hauling around a lot of them to get a decent amount of shooting options. You could probably find a lens that allows manual zooming without a battery if that's a problem.
In the Structure section the schedule is said to be September 2005.
I think it's called Flashblock (for Firefox).