Is an internal web site. Unless you can VPN into my company's intranet, then log into the web site itself, you aren't going to be able to look at it.
We have a mix of Solaris, MS, and mainframe but this particular web site is IIS and all desktops are Winblows. So I can easily expect all users to view the site in IE 4+. That does make development simpler. I don't have to worry about java script that runs on every type of browser. But if I were doing sites for general use, I'd definitely pick up this book.
-Steve
My company just went through a big merger in which the company color changed. I had to redo an internal web site because it had about 10 different shades of the old color. I couldn't redo it from scratch but I did remove all in-line references to color and set it up to use a single style sheet. The page sizes are a little smaller and the next merger/color change should be a lot easier. -Steve
Actually it's been the 28th in New Zealand for some time now....they're right next to the international date line.
There's something on the web site about being logged-in as 'guest', but I think that's just BS on the site for "look-and-feel" effect.
Has anyone seen a link to download the full movie? Does anyone know how long the whole movie is?
-Steve
So how does escape velocity play into this? If we can leave the earth without reaching an escape velocity then (on a very theoretical level) could we ride a space elevator out of the event horizon of a black hole? I realize there's a million other reasons why we couldn't get near a black hole, hawking radiation, strong gravity would rip us apart, etc. But you could also apply this argument to other things, like going into Jupiters' upper atmosphere which has bucko gravity. I was taught escape velocity was unavoidable to get out of a gravity hole. -Steve
I wonder if we work at the same bank. If so, I helped write that timekeeping system. (AMS??) I don't want to mention the bank name.
Anyway, the system I'm refering to is a home-grown ASP/SQL server solution. It's big, but nothing terribly complicated about it. The business units love it because we can add time codes (like 'Site closed-Hurricane') on short notice and make other adjustments when necessary.
It doesn't have a 'clock-in/out' feature. It's up to the managers to make sure time sheets aren't falsified. I'm in a different part of the bank that uses a horrible vendor product that has both manual entry (horrible VB interface to Oracle) and a clock-in/out client. My boss wanted me to use the clock-in/out client but I refused stating that there are things I do before I boot my computer that are 'on-the-clock' and they weren't getting that time for free.... but that's a different rant.
-Steve
Initially the RAM disk idea would work. Most modern OSes have RAM disk capability, so there wouldn't really need to be major modifications.
Correct, but it still begs the question, how would storage evolve when memory and storage are the same thing. A program has to have a way to store data so it can be retrieved next time it runs. So is RAM-disk the best method? I doubt it but I don't have a lot of other ideas at the moment.
Oh yeah...just in case it hasn't already been done.... imageine a beowolf cluster of spintronic devices....etc.etc.
-Steve
I remember reading an article on this technology about 15 years ago. The article said it would hold a few terabytes non-volitile in the size of a sugar-cube (2cm^2). My immediate reaction was how would this affect programming and OS when the line between memory and storage is disolved. Not sure if the interface to CPU would be as fast as current memory, which means it would just be a storage mechanism.
If it could be used for primary memory, what happens to files and how they are viewed (logistically not physically). Would we need 'virtual' files on a RAM-disk or something more abstract?
Time will tell..... -Steve
Sorry but it would still be a linear processor. This seems to be just a communication technology, with little effect as to how things are 'computed' . Using multiple processors to simulate neural nets has certainly been done before... but that doesn't really help with the core problem. Any function performed on multiple processors can be duplicated (albeit slower) on a single processor. Alan Turing proved that before ENIAC was built. The real solution for AI (in my humble opinion) will come when we figure out how to solve problems that are 'uncomputable' on a Turing Machine. -Steve
I just got back from a vacation in Orlando where we took a day to go over to the Kennedy Space Center. There was much more to do and see there than I expected. The best part was seeing the never-used Saturn V rocket from Apollo 18. Other cool stuff is a bus tour (extra $) that takes you up to (not in) the vehicle assembly building, and around launch pads 39a&b.
I even got a cool shirt that says 'I Need My Space'.
The trip invigorated me about space exploration.
Truely we must dream!
It is a must see if you're in Orlando. It's only a 45 minute drive.
-Steve
...anything at the top would still feel gravity from earth.
Right. That's what I was saying above.
IANA oceanographer but I think the depth at the north pole is shallow enough so you could have the structure on the ocean floor. I know the ice breaks up every summer to form floats...which is a whole different problem. I'm also curious how a structure like that would interact with the Van Allen belt, and other wierd upper atmosphere things that happen in the North. ...but again... it's a dead-end idea. Sorry for beating the dead horse. -Steve
If the top moves at a different speed than the bottom, the tower will eventually break.
That's what I was saying....which is why I thought of building it near a pole.
It will move at the same angular velocity as the Earth, since its fixed to it.
So are you saying that (asuming it could be built...) that a 100 mile tower at the equater would not lean to the west (I mistakenly put east in the original email...) due to earth rotation? Im not trying to beat a dead horse here... the tower is a dumb idea purly for the reason that it doesn't get you in orbit, that would still require bucko fuel at ~90% gravity. Just trying to figure out what you're saying. Muchas Gracias. -Steve
I thought of this about 20 years ago... I hadn't heard of Aurther C Clarke's The Fountains of Paradise[amazon.com] but I also wasn't naive enough to think it was the first time anyone thought of it. But I gave it a lot of thought...instead of paying attention in spanish class.
It seemed the first problem is weight but, as most have, I put that on the back burner. I thought about a tower about 100 miles high. The main problem I could think of is speed. The top of the tower would have to travel faster than the bottom, which would make it continuously bend towards the east if built near the equater. The simple solution is to built it at the north pole or the south pole. Another problem is heat. IANA Physicist but I imagine structure so heavy would generate heat on the structure. The cool water of the north (or south) could be used to cool it. The only other ideas I could come up with was to build a thin frame from titanium. Carbon nano-tubes would work better but thats vapor-tech for the time being. A self-powered cart could crawl up the interior of the frame. The frame could have a system of gyroscopes and small rockets every 500M or so to keep the tower straight.
Does anyone know how much gravity the Earth exerts at 100 miles versus sea level? 30%?
That would still be a lot of fuel to put a sattelite into orbit!
But if it could be done, it would certainly be revolutionary to space travel.
-Steve
Slashdot Mirror
Is an internal web site. Unless you can VPN into my company's intranet, then log into the web site itself, you aren't going to be able to look at it.
We have a mix of Solaris, MS, and mainframe but this particular web site is IIS and all desktops are Winblows. So I can easily expect all users to view the site in IE 4+. That does make development simpler. I don't have to worry about java script that runs on every type of browser. But if I were doing sites for general use, I'd definitely pick up this book. -Steve
My company just went through a big merger in which the company color changed. I had to redo an internal web site because it had about 10 different shades of the old color. I couldn't redo it from scratch but I did remove all in-line references to color and set it up to use a single style sheet. The page sizes are a little smaller and the next merger/color change should be a lot easier.
-Steve
Actually it's been the 28th in New Zealand for some time now....they're right next to the international date line. There's something on the web site about being logged-in as 'guest', but I think that's just BS on the site for "look-and-feel" effect.
Has anyone seen a link to download the full movie?
Does anyone know how long the whole movie is?
-Steve
So how does escape velocity play into this? If we can leave the earth without reaching an escape velocity then (on a very theoretical level) could we ride a space elevator out of the event horizon of a black hole? I realize there's a million other reasons why we couldn't get near a black hole, hawking radiation, strong gravity would rip us apart, etc. But you could also apply this argument to other things, like going into Jupiters' upper atmosphere which has bucko gravity. I was taught escape velocity was unavoidable to get out of a gravity hole.
-Steve
I wonder if we work at the same bank. If so, I helped write that timekeeping system. (AMS??) I don't want to mention the bank name.
Anyway, the system I'm refering to is a home-grown ASP/SQL server solution. It's big, but nothing terribly complicated about it. The business units love it because we can add time codes (like 'Site closed-Hurricane') on short notice and make other adjustments when necessary. It doesn't have a 'clock-in/out' feature. It's up to the managers to make sure time sheets aren't falsified.
I'm in a different part of the bank that uses a horrible vendor product that has both manual entry (horrible VB interface to Oracle) and a clock-in/out client. My boss wanted me to use the clock-in/out client but I refused stating that there are things I do before I boot my computer that are 'on-the-clock' and they weren't getting that time for free.... but that's a different rant.
-Steve
A program has to have a way to store data so it can be retrieved next time it runs. So is RAM-disk the best method? I doubt it but I don't have a lot of other ideas at the moment.
Oh yeah...just in case it hasn't already been done.... imageine a beowolf cluster of spintronic devices....etc.etc.
-Steve
I remember reading an article on this technology about 15 years ago. The article said it would hold a few terabytes non-volitile in the size of a sugar-cube (2cm^2).
My immediate reaction was how would this affect programming and OS when the line between memory and storage is disolved. Not sure if the interface to CPU would be as fast as current memory, which means it would just be a storage mechanism.
If it could be used for primary memory, what happens to files and how they are viewed (logistically not physically). Would we need 'virtual' files on a RAM-disk or something more abstract?
Time will tell.....
-Steve
Sorry but it would still be a linear processor.
This seems to be just a communication technology, with little effect as to how things are 'computed' . Using multiple processors to simulate neural nets has certainly been done before... but that doesn't really help with the core problem.
Any function performed on multiple processors can be duplicated (albeit slower) on a single processor. Alan Turing proved that before ENIAC was built.
The real solution for AI (in my humble opinion) will come when we figure out how to solve problems that are 'uncomputable' on a Turing Machine.
-Steve
I just got back from a vacation in Orlando where we took a day to go over to the Kennedy Space Center. There was much more to do and see there than I expected. The best part was seeing the never-used Saturn V rocket from Apollo 18. Other cool stuff is a bus tour (extra $) that takes you up to (not in) the vehicle assembly building, and around launch pads 39a&b.
I even got a cool shirt that says 'I Need My Space'.
The trip invigorated me about space exploration.
Truely we must dream!
It is a must see if you're in Orlando. It's only a 45 minute drive.
-Steve
IANA oceanographer but I think the depth at the north pole is shallow enough so you could have the structure on the ocean floor. I know the ice breaks up every summer to form floats...which is a whole different problem.
I'm also curious how a structure like that would interact with the Van Allen belt, and other wierd upper atmosphere things that happen in the North.
...but again... it's a dead-end idea. Sorry for beating the dead horse. -Steve
Im not trying to beat a dead horse here... the tower is a dumb idea purly for the reason that it doesn't get you in orbit, that would still require bucko fuel at ~90% gravity. Just trying to figure out what you're saying. Muchas Gracias. -Steve
I thought of this about 20 years ago... I hadn't heard of Aurther C Clarke's The Fountains of Paradise [amazon.com] but I also wasn't naive enough to think it was the first time anyone thought of it. But I gave it a lot of thought...instead of paying attention in spanish class. It seemed the first problem is weight but, as most have, I put that on the back burner. I thought about a tower about 100 miles high. The main problem I could think of is speed. The top of the tower would have to travel faster than the bottom, which would make it continuously bend towards the east if built near the equater. The simple solution is to built it at the north pole or the south pole. Another problem is heat. IANA Physicist but I imagine structure so heavy would generate heat on the structure. The cool water of the north (or south) could be used to cool it. The only other ideas I could come up with was to build a thin frame from titanium. Carbon nano-tubes would work better but thats vapor-tech for the time being. A self-powered cart could crawl up the interior of the frame. The frame could have a system of gyroscopes and small rockets every 500M or so to keep the tower straight. Does anyone know how much gravity the Earth exerts at 100 miles versus sea level? 30%? That would still be a lot of fuel to put a sattelite into orbit! But if it could be done, it would certainly be revolutionary to space travel. -Steve