I suspect a binder will be worse. A jewel case holds the disc firmly in the middle, with (ideally) nothing in contact with the recording surface. For long-term storage you definitely don't want anything in contact with the recording surface. Putting a disk in a soft plastic sleeve in a binder sounds like a sure recipe for eventual failure.
This is clearly one step in a process, though. Their goal is eventually to get down to the level of tagging each individual item. It's cheaper to start at the case level and work their way down as the technology gets cheaper.
The D-T reaction has the lowest threshold energy, which means that it will run at the lowest temperature and pressure of any fusion reaction. Even so, it is still very difficult to achieve. The He3 reactions are interesting because a reactor based on them would produce much less radioactive waste than a D-T reactor. It may even be possible to produce a fusion reactor that produces no radioactive waste at all, although this is difficult.
transfer the energy back to the earth in a form of a laser beam or something.
Before anybody jumps on this, the better solution is likely to be microwaves. You don't want to be pointing a multikilowatt laser at the Earth, for obvious reasons. The Industrial Physicist magazine had a recent article on this, with a followup article two months later. There were also a number of letters to the editor with responses from the author on this issue.
It just makes good sense to start laying the groundwork for a mining opperation if it will take 10-15 years to get going.
Yes, but practical D-He3 fusion is probably 50-150 years away. D-T fusion is much easier and it has been about 50 years away for at least 25 years now.
It is far too early to be even thinking about extraterrestrial sources of He3 for fusion power. We need to get D-T fusion working commercially first.
All College/University material, regardless of whether it was lectures/notes given or work sumbitted by students is IP of the University, so it can decide what and when to do with it.
You go to a really crappy school. Credible universities do not work this way.
The system doesn't work against paper mills because the output of a paper mill is new content, that's why it is a mill.
You don't think paper mills only sell a given essay once do you? The first student at a Turnitin university who uses the essay gets away with it. Everybody else gets nailed.
If the intent is to protect against cheaters, then the teachers should submit the papers to the service for verification.
The problem with that is that since the company keeps the papers that are turned in and uses them as an asset, this would violate the students' copyrights. The professors do not have the legal right to give the students' original work to an external company unless there is some legal agreement in place between the students and the university, which allows this.
I'm pretty sure the prececpt of almost ALL academic ventures is that it goes into the open domain. Once a professor publishes a paper, it's made freely available for use provided that you make the correct citations.
You are mistaken. Academic papers are copyrighted. Perversely, in order to get them published the researchers turn over their copyrights to the company that publishes the scientific journal. The researchers are usually not paid for this, and in fact frequently have to pay the journal a fee for publishing their work. The journals jealously guard their copyright in the published works. Researchers cannot typically even post the published version of the paper on their own website, although some journals allow earlier versions of the same work to be posted online. The researchers do usually get printed copies of their paper they can mail to colleagues, although they sometimes have to pay a fee for these.
Unless there is some legal agreement to the contrary, undergraduate students clearly own the copyright to anything they write. It is not completely unheard of for a gifted student to later publish something that was originally written for a class, and this should not be discouraged.
If the university wants to continue using this service, what they really need is a licensing agreement with their students, which gives the university the right to keep copies of the papers and use them for plagiarism checking, and gives them the right to assign this right to someone else (i.e. Turnitin). Such an agreement should be signed at the beginning of the program, and it needs to be explicit that the students' compensation for licinsing their work is the consideration of their work for academic credit. A licensing agreement online with Turnitin will not do, since Turnitin is not able to offer the students any kind of compensation for licensing their work. (A contract is only valid if both parties receive some form of compensation for whatever they are giving up.)
It depends how toxic or how carcinogenic. Just last week I heard a news story which recommended that pregnant women should limit their consumption of farmed tuna because the tuna had excessive levels of mercury in them. Maybe the mercury would eventually kill the tuna but presumably most get 'harvested' before that happens.
It is not a genetic change that is passed on in BSE/CJD. It is a defective protein. The "normal" protein occurs naturally in both cows and humans. The "defective" version has the property that when it encounters a "normal" protein of that type, it alters it to the defective form. Once you have some of the defective form in your brain, more and more of the "normal" protein becomes converted to the defective form over time, resulting in brain damage.
Is there any evidence at all that eating a genetically altered animal will in any way effect the genetics of the animal that consumes it?
No, but it is possible that a genetically altered animal might produce proteins that would be harmful to animals that eat it, or people that eat those animals. If you don't believe me, look up prions for an example of a harmful protein that can be passed on in this way.
A more likely harmful situation would be for a genetically altered creature to produce compounds that are simply toxic or carcinogenic. Those might also be passed on up the food chain.
Learn to touch type. I'm usually limited by the thought process, not by the typing. And typing runs "in the background", without much conscious thought.
Stores legally must accept returns of defective merchandise. If the DVD won't play on your TV, it is defective. They are free to replace the defective DVD with another DVD of the same movie, but if that is defective too you are free to return it as well. Keep going until you run through their entire stock or they give in and give you your money back.
They're nowhere near as expensive as, say, a high-quality Rolex. Not only that, but they won't last nearly as long: they'll either get wet, simply stop working, or wear out electronically long before a Rolex begins to stop keeping the correct time.
A good quality digital watch can last a long time. I had a Seiko digital that I wore every day for over ten years. I eventually broke the lens in an accident. The watch still worked, but I bought a new one instead of replacing the lens.
It does seem to be harder to get good quality digital watches these days though. Most people just buy the cheap ones and replace them more often.
They mentioned compositing together several images from different filters to get a fair approximation of what the human eye would percieve if it was there.
That's just it. The camera captures separate images through various filters (possibly red, green, and blue), which are then merged back on earth to produce a color photo. With only a finite number of filters, this always involves some "color correction". The colored spots on the sundial act as a calibration guide for this process, since they have known spectral characteristics.
Keep in mind too that they haven't had time yet to take pictures of everything with every filter. Obviously the first "big" photo to take is the high-res panoramic view of the surroundings, captured with whichever filters give the best scientific information (for identification of rock types, etc.) This doesn't necessarily give you the most accurate depiction of what a human would see, although one can try to correct for the filters after the fact.
Even then you would want to send astronauts to Mars orbit without landing (like Apollo 10).
I don't think we would send astronauts to Mars and then not have them land. The journey to Mars is too long and too dangerous to just turn around and come home. A better approach would be to have some of the human-less dry runs actually land and take off again under computer control.
Frankly Amazon.com is nothing more than a large catalog mail order store. Its just that the catalog and much of the ordering process has been automated by computers.
I think that this underestimates the significance of what Amazon has done. Your typical pre-internet mail order store took six weeks to deliver an order from the time you mailed it in, and had a much more limited selection of items. Amazon's key innovation was speed: they have a huge stock of items that can be shipped in less than a day, and their order fulfillment is extremely dependable. Because you can get an item delivered in only a few days (or 1 day if you're willing to pay extra), people will buy things on Amazon that they would otherwise have gone to the store for. Conventional catalog houses did't "steal" business from the brick and mortar sector this way. It can actually be quicker (in terms of my time) to order something from Amazon than to drive to a store and look for it, especially if the item is not guaranteed to be in stock at the first store I go to. Amazon has certainly changed the way I shop, and I suspect many others would say the same. That is a new business model at work.
Similarly, EBay has created an entirely new market for used goods, like nothing that existed before. Yes, it is similar to conventional auctions, but it draws in an entirely new pool of customers who would never have bought or sold at an auction before. That is definitely a new business model.
Slashdot Mirror
I suspect a binder will be worse. A jewel case holds the disc firmly in the middle, with (ideally) nothing in contact with the recording surface. For long-term storage you definitely don't want anything in contact with the recording surface. Putting a disk in a soft plastic sleeve in a binder sounds like a sure recipe for eventual failure.
This is clearly one step in a process, though. Their goal is eventually to get down to the level of tagging each individual item. It's cheaper to start at the case level and work their way down as the technology gets cheaper.
Silver tarnish is silver sulfide (Ag2S) not silver oxide.
Gold is third, after copper.
Actually, silver usually tarnishes instead.
Do you think we can bring it back from the moon for less than several hundred bucks per litre?
The D-T reaction has the lowest threshold energy, which means that it will run at the lowest temperature and pressure of any fusion reaction. Even so, it is still very difficult to achieve. The He3 reactions are interesting because a reactor based on them would produce much less radioactive waste than a D-T reactor. It may even be possible to produce a fusion reactor that produces no radioactive waste at all, although this is difficult.
Before anybody jumps on this, the better solution is likely to be microwaves. You don't want to be pointing a multikilowatt laser at the Earth, for obvious reasons. The Industrial Physicist magazine had a recent article on this, with a followup article two months later. There were also a number of letters to the editor with responses from the author on this issue.
Yes, but practical D-He3 fusion is probably 50-150 years away. D-T fusion is much easier and it has been about 50 years away for at least 25 years now.
It is far too early to be even thinking about extraterrestrial sources of He3 for fusion power. We need to get D-T fusion working commercially first.
You go to a really crappy school. Credible universities do not work this way.
You don't think paper mills only sell a given essay once do you? The first student at a Turnitin university who uses the essay gets away with it. Everybody else gets nailed.
The problem with that is that since the company keeps the papers that are turned in and uses them as an asset, this would violate the students' copyrights. The professors do not have the legal right to give the students' original work to an external company unless there is some legal agreement in place between the students and the university, which allows this.
You are mistaken. Academic papers are copyrighted. Perversely, in order to get them published the researchers turn over their copyrights to the company that publishes the scientific journal. The researchers are usually not paid for this, and in fact frequently have to pay the journal a fee for publishing their work. The journals jealously guard their copyright in the published works. Researchers cannot typically even post the published version of the paper on their own website, although some journals allow earlier versions of the same work to be posted online. The researchers do usually get printed copies of their paper they can mail to colleagues, although they sometimes have to pay a fee for these.
Unless there is some legal agreement to the contrary, undergraduate students clearly own the copyright to anything they write. It is not completely unheard of for a gifted student to later publish something that was originally written for a class, and this should not be discouraged.
If the university wants to continue using this service, what they really need is a licensing agreement with their students, which gives the university the right to keep copies of the papers and use them for plagiarism checking, and gives them the right to assign this right to someone else (i.e. Turnitin). Such an agreement should be signed at the beginning of the program, and it needs to be explicit that the students' compensation for licinsing their work is the consideration of their work for academic credit. A licensing agreement online with Turnitin will not do, since Turnitin is not able to offer the students any kind of compensation for licensing their work. (A contract is only valid if both parties receive some form of compensation for whatever they are giving up.)
It depends how toxic or how carcinogenic. Just last week I heard a news story which recommended that pregnant women should limit their consumption of farmed tuna because the tuna had excessive levels of mercury in them. Maybe the mercury would eventually kill the tuna but presumably most get 'harvested' before that happens.
This explanation is highly simplified, of course.
No, but it is possible that a genetically altered animal might produce proteins that would be harmful to animals that eat it, or people that eat those animals. If you don't believe me, look up prions for an example of a harmful protein that can be passed on in this way.
A more likely harmful situation would be for a genetically altered creature to produce compounds that are simply toxic or carcinogenic. Those might also be passed on up the food chain.
The stormtroopers were always supposed to be clones.
Learn to touch type. I'm usually limited by the thought process, not by the typing. And typing runs "in the background", without much conscious thought.
Stores legally must accept returns of defective merchandise. If the DVD won't play on your TV, it is defective. They are free to replace the defective DVD with another DVD of the same movie, but if that is defective too you are free to return it as well. Keep going until you run through their entire stock or they give in and give you your money back.
A good quality digital watch can last a long time. I had a Seiko digital that I wore every day for over ten years. I eventually broke the lens in an accident. The watch still worked, but I bought a new one instead of replacing the lens.
It does seem to be harder to get good quality digital watches these days though. Most people just buy the cheap ones and replace them more often.
That's just it. The camera captures separate images through various filters (possibly red, green, and blue), which are then merged back on earth to produce a color photo. With only a finite number of filters, this always involves some "color correction". The colored spots on the sundial act as a calibration guide for this process, since they have known spectral characteristics.
Keep in mind too that they haven't had time yet to take pictures of everything with every filter. Obviously the first "big" photo to take is the high-res panoramic view of the surroundings, captured with whichever filters give the best scientific information (for identification of rock types, etc.) This doesn't necessarily give you the most accurate depiction of what a human would see, although one can try to correct for the filters after the fact.
Imagine what the environmentalists would say about that!
I don't think we would send astronauts to Mars and then not have them land. The journey to Mars is too long and too dangerous to just turn around and come home. A better approach would be to have some of the human-less dry runs actually land and take off again under computer control.
A failed human mission to Mars would give extremely bad PR.
I think that this underestimates the significance of what Amazon has done. Your typical pre-internet mail order store took six weeks to deliver an order from the time you mailed it in, and had a much more limited selection of items. Amazon's key innovation was speed: they have a huge stock of items that can be shipped in less than a day, and their order fulfillment is extremely dependable. Because you can get an item delivered in only a few days (or 1 day if you're willing to pay extra), people will buy things on Amazon that they would otherwise have gone to the store for. Conventional catalog houses did't "steal" business from the brick and mortar sector this way. It can actually be quicker (in terms of my time) to order something from Amazon than to drive to a store and look for it, especially if the item is not guaranteed to be in stock at the first store I go to. Amazon has certainly changed the way I shop, and I suspect many others would say the same. That is a new business model at work.
Similarly, EBay has created an entirely new market for used goods, like nothing that existed before. Yes, it is similar to conventional auctions, but it draws in an entirely new pool of customers who would never have bought or sold at an auction before. That is definitely a new business model.