More specifically, this works because the "propeller" (rotating sail, really (*)) goes slower than the wind, relative to it. And achieves this by exploiting the resistance of surface (the difference in speed between it and the wind) - just like sailboats do when tackling. (*)In their case the resistance allowing the sail to move sideways comes from the keel & water; here it comes from wheels and ground - and the sail also moves sideways! (relative to the wind, all that matters; don't let the propeller-like look trick you)
But, people don't really "feel" how even sailboats propel themselves while tackling...
Not much better here, across the Neisse and Oder - with Nokia S30 phones (and other similarly simple ones) basically at most included in some prepaid packs, when it comes to "official" channels.
C1-00 being barely available anyway, just few auctions and ridiculously overpriced for now (~2x 1616) - which seems to be a common problem for such simple phones, when new they are very closely priced to some decently nice S40 handsets (C1-01 for example - also quite basic & straightforward; not really destroyed by inclusion of GPRS & j2me (Opera Mini, IM), simple camera or radio & mp3 player functionality... bringing greater affordability of those features). Though TBH, even if EU prices of cheap handsets don't follow the "trademark" ones, I'm probably also spoiled - with price differences in those ranges merely appearing negligible to us.
However, IMHO, if you're looking for something - 1100 is the benchmark, the ultimate lowest-end:) (plus, since almost certainly available only in used state, its prices seem more appropriate(*)). Also the last one not borked by pointless inclusion of 4-way D-pad, which only gets in your way in S30 - 1100 has just bi-directional up&down, what the S30 UI was meant for... (arguably, the same still applies to S40) Plus "the world's best selling phone" & "best selling single type of electronic consumer device in history" have a nice ring to it, give it a nice status.
(*)Hopefully not influenced anymore by the hoax about suitability (of German-made;p ) 1100 to some supposed firmware modification allowing serious sms fraud...
The CIA uses the same figures. They don't bother to try settle this problem.
Maybe it means there's not much of a problem. NVM how the numbers are slightly different after all, and place in rankings noticeably different.
And I'm mostly laughing at "greater acceptance of personal risk" - what does it change?! (even if it's true, when described in such a nice way; indulging in risky behavior doesn't lead directly to "acceptance of personal risk")
Don't you know? It's just more lies! (conservation of momentum) All a conspiracy to make the few true geniuses struggle. But eventually, they will be recognized and place on the pedestal, among other few greatest minds of science...
Energia would be probably nice, yes, in launches without Buran (but still probably not very cost effective due to scale and rarity of the launches). HOTOL was apparently dropped when it became clear that a rocket using the same technological advances would be at least equally effective (but much less complex). And you would want to up the size of the Shuttle?
An orbital launcher flies most of its mission outside the atmosphere. Most of its mass is reaction mass. That, together with what the rocket equation is, probably means a pure rocket will be able, for a long time, to better use technological advances necessary to make a true spaceplane even barely possible.
But perhaps such advances are not even the best way, perhaps simple mass-production would be better. We had a test run, with the first widely used rocket; too bad the orbital effort in such style was killed.
Unless something was not the best idea in the first place, and even worse implementation (did the Shuttle deliver on any of its main points, as advertised?)
60s, 70s...its designers probably raised on scifi with a whole lot of spaceplanes - no doubt influenced by huge airplane advances in the 40s. Which differed quite a lot from those 130 year old depiction of "our" times (/. & links with unicode...), apparently influenced by rapid advances in (sub?)marine technology. We can build them (take a Harrier, remove wings and canopy), but it doesn't make those past dreams a good idea. Not a lot flying boats around nowadays, too.
"Probes searching our galaxy" - probably not the best way we could spend our time and resources. For a probe not to be destroyed on impact, it would need to be on virtually the same orbit before contact already - and all this for a fairly slow ride into still very close emptiness (the comet being the target of exploration - that's a different thing)
However I do agree, in principle, that this might be how we will explore the galaxy, eventually. Oort cloud harbors perhaps even a trillion comets - that's a lot of resources for space habitats. Establishing them should be easier than interstellar travel (which almost certainly would just give another "barren" system, no reason to hurry) - and after thousands of years, some groups might hitch a ride in some other cloud, when its star will pass nearby.
Considering some moderately decent processing and memory on the Kinect, but miniscule amount of flash, it appears the code is loaded each time from the console...
(I am not the only one thinking "ze german villain and his accomplice" at the above, right? Anyway, certainly nothing better than to be such villain and have such accomplice)
The suits from this story, maybe (hey, who knows to where the idea will lead in the end?) but not biosuit I linked to - it needs uniform mechanical pressure and non-extending lines on the skin. Anything too...wobbly and it's a no go, apparently.
Sure, it does and gives something...but nowhere near as attractive as its capabilities as a full product would suggest. Probably nothing too hot, especially with the amount of modifications and new software required (getting our hands on the basic processing Kinect does and sends (probably depthmap) should be hard enough considering it's certainly integrated with & code loaded from the X360 side - so, probably just a basic ARM board with slightly atypical webcams, in practice; which still needs new code loaded from somewhere)
Generally, I'm also fed up that it turned out not to be a TOF camera (almost seems like MS bought ZCam only for their software & perhaps to kill off possibly competing product...)
The bottom line seems to be: since some...tissues can't really maintain shape when put under mechanical pressure (what those tight suits are about), this means big breasts seem to be destined to die out, confined to this planet.
MS said they dropped doing the heavy processing on Kinect itself... 1, 2, 3. What's left does at best "entry stages" of processing, which don't give you much... (especially since MS certainly keeps the juicy details of their approach secret, an approach to which entry stages are adapted).
512 megabytes of ram would sound big, yes, so I just checked - it's 512 megabits. Nothing too unexpected for a device dealing with lots of images.
And as I mentioned, the flash is 1 MiB; certainly nothing more than basic firmware.
But the bulk of the interesting stuff happens on the X360 - ARM cpu and (mostly for large buffer, perhaps?) memory don't have to be very useful with 1 MiB of flash onboard... after all, everything beyond firmware (and still quite basic processing) can be loaded from X360.
So, at best, there needs to be another machine loading the code anyway (OK, perhaps if one cares about the aesthetics it could be done even by some AVR & USB Flash, AVR acting also as I/O for the body...), and without the access to defining qualities of Kinect.
Hardware-wise, Kinect isn't anything particularly special - basically few mics, simple visible light webcam, two stereoscopically arranged IR ones (take out IR filter from an ordinary webcam, replace it with non-exposed part of photographic film) capturing projected light pattern, very limited tilting.
Everything very interesting and useful happens on the CPU of X360...
It's not merely a case of drivers, you'd need highly specific software anyway. Might as well use 2 inexpensive webcams.
Slashdot Mirror
The blades of the "propeller" (rotating sail) move sideways.
More specifically, this works because the "propeller" (rotating sail, really (*)) goes slower than the wind, relative to it. And achieves this by exploiting the resistance of surface (the difference in speed between it and the wind) - just like sailboats do when tackling. (*)In their case the resistance allowing the sail to move sideways comes from the keel & water; here it comes from wheels and ground - and the sail also moves sideways! (relative to the wind, all that matters; don't let the propeller-like look trick you)
But, people don't really "feel" how even sailboats propel themselves while tackling...
Not much better here, across the Neisse and Oder - with Nokia S30 phones (and other similarly simple ones) basically at most included in some prepaid packs, when it comes to "official" channels.
C1-00 being barely available anyway, just few auctions and ridiculously overpriced for now (~2x 1616) - which seems to be a common problem for such simple phones, when new they are very closely priced to some decently nice S40 handsets (C1-01 for example - also quite basic & straightforward; not really destroyed by inclusion of GPRS & j2me (Opera Mini, IM), simple camera or radio & mp3 player functionality ... bringing greater affordability of those features). Though TBH, even if EU prices of cheap handsets don't follow the "trademark" ones, I'm probably also spoiled - with price differences in those ranges merely appearing negligible to us.
However, IMHO, if you're looking for something - 1100 is the benchmark, the ultimate lowest-end :) (plus, since almost certainly available only in used state, its prices seem more appropriate(*)). Also the last one not borked by pointless inclusion of 4-way D-pad, which only gets in your way in S30 - 1100 has just bi-directional up&down, what the S30 UI was meant for... (arguably, the same still applies to S40)
Plus "the world's best selling phone" & "best selling single type of electronic consumer device in history" have a nice ring to it, give it a nice status.
(*)Hopefully not influenced anymore by the hoax about suitability (of German-made ;p ) 1100 to some supposed firmware modification allowing serious sms fraud...
The CIA uses the same figures. They don't bother to try settle this problem.
Maybe it means there's not much of a problem. NVM how the numbers are slightly different after all, and place in rankings noticeably different.
And I'm mostly laughing at "greater acceptance of personal risk" - what does it change?! (even if it's true, when described in such a nice way; indulging in risky behavior doesn't lead directly to "acceptance of personal risk")
And life expectancy is misleading because it doesn't take into account different definitions of infant mortality...
CIA World Factbook gives virtually the same number as UN does, and places the US further down in rankings.
...or the US's greater acceptance of personal risk.
That explains the litigious spirit in the society, I guess.
Don't you know? It's just more lies! (conservation of momentum) All a conspiracy to make the few true geniuses struggle. But eventually, they will be recognized and place on the pedestal, among other few greatest minds of science...
Energia would be probably nice, yes, in launches without Buran (but still probably not very cost effective due to scale and rarity of the launches). HOTOL was apparently dropped when it became clear that a rocket using the same technological advances would be at least equally effective (but much less complex). And you would want to up the size of the Shuttle?
An orbital launcher flies most of its mission outside the atmosphere. Most of its mass is reaction mass. That, together with what the rocket equation is, probably means a pure rocket will be able, for a long time, to better use technological advances necessary to make a true spaceplane even barely possible.
But perhaps such advances are not even the best way, perhaps simple mass-production would be better. We had a test run, with the first widely used rocket; too bad the orbital effort in such style was killed.
Unless something was not the best idea in the first place, and even worse implementation (did the Shuttle deliver on any of its main points, as advertised?)
60s, 70s...its designers probably raised on scifi with a whole lot of spaceplanes - no doubt influenced by huge airplane advances in the 40s. Which differed quite a lot from those 130 year old depiction of "our" times (/. & links with unicode...), apparently influenced by rapid advances in (sub?)marine technology. We can build them (take a Harrier, remove wings and canopy), but it doesn't make those past dreams a good idea. Not a lot flying boats around nowadays, too.
"Probes searching our galaxy" - probably not the best way we could spend our time and resources. For a probe not to be destroyed on impact, it would need to be on virtually the same orbit before contact already - and all this for a fairly slow ride into still very close emptiness (the comet being the target of exploration - that's a different thing)
However I do agree, in principle, that this might be how we will explore the galaxy, eventually. Oort cloud harbors perhaps even a trillion comets - that's a lot of resources for space habitats. Establishing them should be easier than interstellar travel (which almost certainly would just give another "barren" system, no reason to hurry) - and after thousands of years, some groups might hitch a ride in some other cloud, when its star will pass nearby.
Considering some moderately decent processing and memory on the Kinect, but miniscule amount of flash, it appears the code is loaded each time from the console...
Really ironically...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_SenseCam
Seemingly cute, too...
(I am not the only one thinking "ze german villain and his accomplice" at the above, right? Anyway, certainly nothing better than to be such villain and have such accomplice)
The suits from this story, maybe (hey, who knows to where the idea will lead in the end?) but not biosuit I linked to - it needs uniform mechanical pressure and non-extending lines on the skin. Anything too...wobbly and it's a no go, apparently.
Sure, it does and gives something...but nowhere near as attractive as its capabilities as a full product would suggest. Probably nothing too hot, especially with the amount of modifications and new software required (getting our hands on the basic processing Kinect does and sends (probably depthmap) should be hard enough considering it's certainly integrated with & code loaded from the X360 side - so, probably just a basic ARM board with slightly atypical webcams, in practice; which still needs new code loaded from somewhere)
Generally, I'm also fed up that it turned out not to be a TOF camera (almost seems like MS bought ZCam only for their software & perhaps to kill off possibly competing product...)
Of course, those other concerns are already disrupted in 0g as is...
Some of us would also like them more often to be females.
There is one somewhat related EVA suit, too: http://mvl.mit.edu/EVA/biosuit/index.html
The bottom line seems to be: since some...tissues can't really maintain shape when put under mechanical pressure (what those tight suits are about), this means big breasts seem to be destined to die out, confined to this planet.
Mwuahahaha.
MS said they dropped doing the heavy processing on Kinect itself... 1, 2, 3. What's left does at best "entry stages" of processing, which don't give you much... (especially since MS certainly keeps the juicy details of their approach secret, an approach to which entry stages are adapted).
512 megabytes of ram would sound big, yes, so I just checked - it's 512 megabits. Nothing too unexpected for a device dealing with lots of images.
And as I mentioned, the flash is 1 MiB; certainly nothing more than basic firmware.
Or you can just, you know, turn the device off instead of going overboard with paranoia. or even better - not buy it.
Even if $150 manufacturing cost is the case - don't forget how this "selling at cost" (not actually harmful in itself) will apply only in one market.
But the bulk of the interesting stuff happens on the X360 - ARM cpu and (mostly for large buffer, perhaps?) memory don't have to be very useful with 1 MiB of flash onboard... after all, everything beyond firmware (and still quite basic processing) can be loaded from X360.
So, at best, there needs to be another machine loading the code anyway (OK, perhaps if one cares about the aesthetics it could be done even by some AVR & USB Flash, AVR acting also as I/O for the body...), and without the access to defining qualities of Kinect.
The most interesting (and at the same time inexpensive) that I heard about, ZCam TOF camera, was essentially bought & killed by MS...
Microsoft is losing money on these Kinect units
^this one is really one of those [citation needed] cases
They'll want it when it's ready, nicely integrated and a must-have feature of Win8.
Hardware-wise, Kinect isn't anything particularly special - basically few mics, simple visible light webcam, two stereoscopically arranged IR ones (take out IR filter from an ordinary webcam, replace it with non-exposed part of photographic film) capturing projected light pattern, very limited tilting.
Everything very interesting and useful happens on the CPU of X360...
It's not merely a case of drivers, you'd need highly specific software anyway. Might as well use 2 inexpensive webcams.