We also think about the past, how quickly it...passed, much more often when we are older. If we can't help being fixated on the idea then of course that's just what we're convincing ourselves in.
There might be even more direct mechanism in this; supposedly we perceive passage of time that's happening right now as faster with much of activity, slower without it. But when it comes to memories, it's reversed - when there was hardly anything going on, that period seems like a blink of an eye; almost nonexistant.
So...young, lots of things to do, time quickly passes by; but when you stop for a minute and look back it seems like so much (even though it's only, say, a decade of truly concious experience). But look back when much older and later decades aren't nearly so packed, with less of memorable events, hence seem "faster"?
Uhmm, that's another deceptive statistic. When you go to ER (if that's "deaths-per-ER-visit") there's usually a reason, you know... If looking at "as a result of going to the hospital" (which is a totally different thing!), not only spin is easy (ignoring that patients have some condition already which weakens them, for example), but also that would show more a problem with hospitals than something great with airlines, if only because those activities aren't comparable at all (I'm not saying that airlines aren't very, very safe...just that sonme other modes of transport are safer)
While generally agreeing with you......when you use those stats remember they are a bit deceptive. Yes, airplanes have very good safety when expressed as deaths per mile; but not so great when in deaths per journey, which is a more usable metric especially in case of airplanes (since short or long high altitude cruise doesn't make that much of a difference for safety). Generally, when travel by rail or bus is practical, it's also safer.
Relativelly. You never seen it, but it sometimes happens (I imagine it usually involves a curve and engine block or transmission of a car getting in the way).
To be fair, the only time when cyclists in some places take over the road to similar degree that motorists do daily, is during critical mass events (which personally I consider to be silly)
As another poster mentioned, Helsinki isn't that great...
But most importantly, you are misguided in proposing that the space for bicycles should be taken out of space for pedestrians. Bicycle in a city can have comparable speed to a car, if not forced into pedestrian sidewalk, so it has no place there.
The solution is much simpler - don't let cars eat your cities, dividing them into inaccessible islands on the premise that cars should be priviledged when it comes to trying, and failing most out of all alternatives (when given the chance), to provide safe and fast mass transportation for people living in said city.
I guess most important reason is that bikes simply aren't perceived as a status symbol, which is a problem where such symbols have too much weight and/or people don't feel the need to be careful with their finances.
That also influences how motorists "treat" bike drivers on the road, I guess...
Two and a half mile sounds fine even as a walking distance TBH; perhaps shorter than that, actually, since often you have more options than following the only sensible bike road. But I guess pedestrian routes and safe crossings generally are also neglected?...
"Primary", where did you get that idea from? More like 3rd; and with mild sleep deprivation.
Anyway, disregarding all mentioned and generally applicable benefits of (even small) German familiarity - it makes those Hitler Youtube remixes much less "enjoyable"; would make them less widespread perhaps. That gotta has value...
Russians had some actual gear for manned missions beyond LEO, both at the stage of contruction and first operational tests (circumlunar flights without a crew onboard), which is certainly more than China can claim. They have also goals right now of course, with the closest one probably being "Mir 3" - supposedly primarilly an orbital shipyard this time (and they have actual immense experience in this). So who knows, perhaps if Russia obtains true economic stability, their space program will pick up steam.
It looks to me like the biggest, underlying source of mess is that NASA is financed from federal budget, but with funding of particular projects bringing great benefits to specific areas / contractors. So of course their representatives will fight for what's good primarily to them, not to space programme as a whole...
ESA seems to be set up more sensibly in this regard. Each memberstate decides how much it wants to pay, so that is the way in which they can have a say when it comes to assigning projects.
Sure, GNUstep is not NeXTSTEP proper, but it has its heart in the right place.
There shouldn't be many problems with installing it on N900, which after all runs basically just Debian on ARM (perhaps GNUstep is already in some appropriate ARM repository). Without any emulation needed and GNUstep being very light, this should be actually quite snappy.
Yeah, he mentioned not the example I had in mind;p (Luna 9, not 13, also in 1966). BTW, with the help of some clever engineering, small part of Luna 2 possibly survived the impact: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luna_2#USSR_pennants1 Not very usefull though...
Hm, then I guess he wants to be remembered as having done something big for humanity? Just like...a lot of obscenelly rich man who acquired their wealth in not exactly "honorable" way.
Seems to be working, I was aware pretty much only of his Aeospace enterprise. And as long as it will really end up "big"...
In vertical flight all the way up they were capable of aroound 200 km. While it is indeed not clear if any were launched that way, in operational flights they attained 90-110 km. Lower number satisfies US definition of "space", which is enough in this case, I gues;p. Higher one fulfills also international definition.
"Space race" undoubtedly played a large part, but it doesn't lessen the point that not only NASA was responsible for major progress. Besides, I like to think it wasn't merely about state level competition - after all there was valuable science being made on both sides, and the first breakthroughs relied on many years of progress being made before the race proper. With later ones also building on that early progress obviously.
Plus...who knows, we might see another race at some point. China gears up, Russia is in many ways more distant to them than US for a long time, India and Japan don't want to be left behind, Europe has a will to rely less on others, private companies see a place for themselves...we'll be good.
Look up the altitude of some A-4 flights, a very German rocket. "Space" doesn't mean orbit, it simply means, well, space.
Also, look up Luna 9, the first moon landing. And Lunokhods (yeah, I somehow subssribe to "rover = unmanned", as you said yourself US ones were moon buggies)
...If it wasn't for NASA we wouldn't ever have visited or learned so much more about Earth....
Hmmm... 1st object in space - Germany 1st Earth satellite - Soviet Union 1st human in orbit - Soviet Union 1st photograph of far side of the Moon - Soviet Union 1st landing on the Moon - Soviet Union 1st rover on another body - Soviet Union 1st large biological specimens outside LEO (around the Moon, in a Zond version of Soyuz...turtles;p ) and brought back safely - Soviet Union 1st landing on Venus - Soviet Union 1st landing on Mars - Soviet Union 1st space station - Soviet Union (BTW, the Russian part of ISS was supposed to be called "Mir 2")
And so on. In the meantime Europe could afford to play the game and they ended up being the biggest, I think, commercial launch operator(?). Or of the biggest anyway. With their ATV they are a small step from having manned spaceflight capability. China has one already, India is working on it, Japan has some plans too, and all are quite active in Solar System exploration. Plus you have private companies.
Music has a big problem of words usualy not being very clear. Stand up comedy has IMHO, contrary to what you say, too narrow scope when it comes to culture...and the nature of the act quickly becomes monotonous.
Movies are a phenomenall way. There really is an unimaginable number of great ones in many languages one would want to learn; and enough of them for very long daily viewing that easily fits your current mood. Yes, it works...my EN skills, while not great, were aquired that way (foreign TV films not being dubbed at my place helped)
It has some hiccups though, Google Ads in Gmail still think my German is Swedish or Norwegian;/ (no complaints from Germans though)
Slashdot Mirror
We also think about the past, how quickly it...passed, much more often when we are older. If we can't help being fixated on the idea then of course that's just what we're convincing ourselves in.
There might be even more direct mechanism in this; supposedly we perceive passage of time that's happening right now as faster with much of activity, slower without it. But when it comes to memories, it's reversed - when there was hardly anything going on, that period seems like a blink of an eye; almost nonexistant.
So...young, lots of things to do, time quickly passes by; but when you stop for a minute and look back it seems like so much (even though it's only, say, a decade of truly concious experience). But look back when much older and later decades aren't nearly so packed, with less of memorable events, hence seem "faster"?
Uhmm, that's another deceptive statistic. When you go to ER (if that's "deaths-per-ER-visit") there's usually a reason, you know... If looking at "as a result of going to the hospital" (which is a totally different thing!), not only spin is easy (ignoring that patients have some condition already which weakens them, for example), but also that would show more a problem with hospitals than something great with airlines, if only because those activities aren't comparable at all (I'm not saying that airlines aren't very, very safe...just that sonme other modes of transport are safer)
While generally agreeing with you... ...when you use those stats remember they are a bit deceptive. Yes, airplanes have very good safety when expressed as deaths per mile; but not so great when in deaths per journey, which is a more usable metric especially in case of airplanes (since short or long high altitude cruise doesn't make that much of a difference for safety). Generally, when travel by rail or bus is practical, it's also safer.
Relativelly. You never seen it, but it sometimes happens (I imagine it usually involves a curve and engine block or transmission of a car getting in the way).
Now, how many times a bike has derailed a train?
Hm, "the survivors / community have to live with it", that nicely sums up blaming the rape victims too.
To be fair, the only time when cyclists in some places take over the road to similar degree that motorists do daily, is during critical mass events (which personally I consider to be silly)
When was the last time you read "Freight train killed my motorist"?
Collision with a car ends in derailing relativelly often, y'know...
As another poster mentioned, Helsinki isn't that great...
But most importantly, you are misguided in proposing that the space for bicycles should be taken out of space for pedestrians. Bicycle in a city can have comparable speed to a car, if not forced into pedestrian sidewalk, so it has no place there.
The solution is much simpler - don't let cars eat your cities, dividing them into inaccessible islands on the premise that cars should be priviledged when it comes to trying, and failing most out of all alternatives (when given the chance), to provide safe and fast mass transportation for people living in said city.
Motorists who think stop signs don't apply to them aren't your favorite ones?
I guess most important reason is that bikes simply aren't perceived as a status symbol, which is a problem where such symbols have too much weight and/or people don't feel the need to be careful with their finances.
That also influences how motorists "treat" bike drivers on the road, I guess...
Two and a half mile sounds fine even as a walking distance TBH; perhaps shorter than that, actually, since often you have more options than following the only sensible bike road. But I guess pedestrian routes and safe crossings generally are also neglected?...
"Primary", where did you get that idea from? More like 3rd; and with mild sleep deprivation.
Anyway, disregarding all mentioned and generally applicable benefits of (even small) German familiarity - it makes those Hitler Youtube remixes much less "enjoyable"; would make them less widespread perhaps. That gotta has value...
Russians had some actual gear for manned missions beyond LEO, both at the stage of contruction and first operational tests (circumlunar flights without a crew onboard), which is certainly more than China can claim. They have also goals right now of course, with the closest one probably being "Mir 3" - supposedly primarilly an orbital shipyard this time (and they have actual immense experience in this). So who knows, perhaps if Russia obtains true economic stability, their space program will pick up steam.
Also, don't forget about ESA and their ATV.
Sure, though reasons I touched on make it a more desirable language then simply when looking at that ranking.
It looks to me like the biggest, underlying source of mess is that NASA is financed from federal budget, but with funding of particular projects bringing great benefits to specific areas / contractors. So of course their representatives will fight for what's good primarily to them, not to space programme as a whole...
ESA seems to be set up more sensibly in this regard. Each memberstate decides how much it wants to pay, so that is the way in which they can have a say when it comes to assigning projects.
Sure, GNUstep is not NeXTSTEP proper, but it has its heart in the right place.
There shouldn't be many problems with installing it on N900, which after all runs basically just Debian on ARM (perhaps GNUstep is already in some appropriate ARM repository). Without any emulation needed and GNUstep being very light, this should be actually quite snappy.
The point wasn't that NASA lacked enormous achievements. It was just pointing out absurdity of "space programme wouldn't exist without NASA"
Yeah, he mentioned not the example I had in mind ;p (Luna 9, not 13, also in 1966). BTW, with the help of some clever engineering, small part of Luna 2 possibly survived the impact: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luna_2#USSR_pennants1
Not very usefull though...
Hm, then I guess he wants to be remembered as having done something big for humanity? Just like...a lot of obscenelly rich man who acquired their wealth in not exactly "honorable" way.
Seems to be working, I was aware pretty much only of his Aeospace enterprise. And as long as it will really end up "big"...
In vertical flight all the way up they were capable of aroound 200 km. While it is indeed not clear if any were launched that way, in operational flights they attained 90-110 km. Lower number satisfies US definition of "space", which is enough in this case, I gues ;p. Higher one fulfills also international definition.
"Space race" undoubtedly played a large part, but it doesn't lessen the point that not only NASA was responsible for major progress. Besides, I like to think it wasn't merely about state level competition - after all there was valuable science being made on both sides, and the first breakthroughs relied on many years of progress being made before the race proper. With later ones also building on that early progress obviously.
Plus...who knows, we might see another race at some point. China gears up, Russia is in many ways more distant to them than US for a long time, India and Japan don't want to be left behind, Europe has a will to rely less on others, private companies see a place for themselves...we'll be good.
Look up the altitude of some A-4 flights, a very German rocket. "Space" doesn't mean orbit, it simply means, well, space.
Also, look up Luna 9, the first moon landing. And Lunokhods (yeah, I somehow subssribe to "rover = unmanned", as you said yourself US ones were moon buggies)
Bigelow Aerospace works on some cool tech that was previously under NASA umbrella. So it's certainly possible.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bigelow_Aerospace
...If it wasn't for NASA we wouldn't ever have visited or learned so much more about Earth....
Hmmm... ;p ) and brought back safely - Soviet Union
1st object in space - Germany
1st Earth satellite - Soviet Union
1st human in orbit - Soviet Union
1st photograph of far side of the Moon - Soviet Union
1st landing on the Moon - Soviet Union
1st rover on another body - Soviet Union
1st large biological specimens outside LEO (around the Moon, in a Zond version of Soyuz...turtles
1st landing on Venus - Soviet Union
1st landing on Mars - Soviet Union
1st space station - Soviet Union (BTW, the Russian part of ISS was supposed to be called "Mir 2")
And so on. In the meantime Europe could afford to play the game and they ended up being the biggest, I think, commercial launch operator(?). Or of the biggest anyway. With their ATV they are a small step from having manned spaceflight capability. China has one already, India is working on it, Japan has some plans too, and all are quite active in Solar System exploration. Plus you have private companies.
I think we'll be fine
Music has a big problem of words usualy not being very clear. Stand up comedy has IMHO, contrary to what you say, too narrow scope when it comes to culture...and the nature of the act quickly becomes monotonous.
Movies are a phenomenall way. There really is an unimaginable number of great ones in many languages one would want to learn; and enough of them for very long daily viewing that easily fits your current mood. Yes, it works...my EN skills, while not great, were aquired that way (foreign TV films not being dubbed at my place helped)
It has some hiccups though, Google Ads in Gmail still think my German is Swedish or Norwegian ;/ (no complaints from Germans though)