So what they're really saying is.....
yadda, yadda, yadda....we don't know what the hell is going on with the universe...everytime we think we do we find something new that throws us all for a loop....
No big surprise....can't believe the astrophysics community takes any "hard data" about the universe seriously since the limitions of what we are able to observe and comprehend right now are staggering...we're just at the very beggining of understanding the universe and it's underlying mechanism....let's quit trying to make bold statments about it's age and "dark matter" when we barely have a clue about it at all...
I swear this community has as many "politicians" wrangling for prestige and power as the government does....
The thing that needs to happen most is to pull back the length of copyright term to something more reasonable. Clearly the current term breeds excessive complacency in the bulk of copyright producers. I'd like to see a study (I'm sure some have been done already) that shows how the overall average of producers of copyright material start with a lot of material (or a singular big effort), then basically produce nothing very quickly afterward, and just rest on their copyrights to provide them their subsistence. This runs counter to the reason for copyright and is explicitly stated in the Constitution as such. Copyright is supposed to stimulate additional progress of science and the useful arts, but if producers of copyright follow the trend of "resting on their terms", then we are in a state of counter productivity with copyright and in violation of the constitutional language intent.
I keep seeing the Disney case brought up as an example of this and what keeps me scratching my head about Disney's big props for extension of copyright is that they continue to refine "the mouse" with new copyrighted material over an over again anyway. I can't understand their fear of the original Mickey Mouse material expiring if they continue to produce new stuff (with brand new copyright terms) that brings in new revenues. Disney is one of the big companies that, because they keep coming out with new stuff, is least of all affected by their old copyrights expiring. The only thing they have to worry about is putting out material that nobody wants, which is a risk all companies have regardless of product. They have a few old classic movies that may not make them money anymore, but that's not where their big money comes from anyway.
Come on folks. I think we've all come to the conclusion that ICE is on it's way out and additional tweaking doesn't solve the problem, just delays the impact. Rather than sink a bunch of money, time and effort into this, we should be sinking money, time and effort into designs that eliminate burning oil products and eliminate emissions entirely. We have working models and prototypes of these types of systems already, why would we need to build another prototype of an "old" model. Doesn't make any sense. I hope this guys gets his funding cut.
Blah, blah, blah...in other news we have the same stories with different names and countries regarding bloodshed, human rights violations, corruption and many others we've seen for the last three millenia.
Microsoft's delays along with the rest of these stories should NOT be shocking to anybody anymore...
Great, now we can re-purchase all of our A/V equipment and movies so we can see all those film artifacts in High Definition. There's going to be nothing quite like having the big black blotches coming to your screen in 720P and up...as well as the original analog audio scores that are going to be giving you a high fidelity tape hiss along with that blotched up screen. Higher resolutions of cruddy productions will just give us high resolution crud!
I'm all for everyone having their say with regard to their opinions. But I have a hard time with this when reading about claims that can't hold water or anything else for that matter. The fact is you can run current kernals on older hardware with slimmed down services and apps running on top of the Linux kernal. Don't see any product from Microsoft that can do or claim this today for x86 PC hardware. This is the claim from the Linux community and it is been substantiated over and over again by the broader computing community for quite some time now.
We guarantee Microsoft Free as in speech, but when are they going to guarantee what they say is actually true and factual?
Funny,
I don't see anyone from the international community jumping to our aid. When the tsunami hit Indonesia, people were screaming at the U.S. to "give, give, give". Now that we've had our own "tsunami", where's the comeback. The oil rich countries are making a killing this year on the U.S. buying it price gouging oil, where's the damn help? Next time someone has a problem, I say go F*&% YOURSELF, international community.
Been waiting around for somebody to come up with something really inovative in the Fusion field of study to shake things up a bit. Been beating the magnetically confined setup for decades and it's still a big if. ITER will pump multi-billions into something that still won't see a pay-off, even if they manage to get beyond break-even and maybe even see ignition.
Laser pulse inerital confinement is way too power intesive as well.
My big question is, can we extract any heat from the damn thing??? If we can't, so much for heating the water to spin the turbine and generator.
It has been beta tested and gone gold and so far it's track record has been much better than MS Windows, and every other OS or software App I'm aware of. It's only crashed twice over 25 years of service in THE most demanding environment imaginable. Show me another system (software or otherwise) that's had this track record over the Shuttle's current and projected longevity?
I'm waiting for the headline that shows that people are using FOSS more and more and because of that the "piracy" rate is decreasing. Except for my OS, everything is use now is FOSS.
Looking at the design of the shuttle we have three major components. The tank, the SRB's and the orbiter itself. We've had catastrophic failures of the orbiter due to the failures of the SRB's and the tank. Are we biding our time until the orbiter is the primary cause? When are we going to finally get to a simpler design? All the major unmanned missions we launch are upgrading their systems to more robust and newer designs that use simpler configurations (which are usually more reliable). The shuttle has provided a great service, but it's time to leverage it's lessons learned and more forward.
Work in the research and development area of the military and can tell you that OSS is prevelant everywhere. If you look at the venders the military is asking to build it's products you will see if you can dig deep enough linux kernals in many of the systems. Primary reason...they can use COTS hardware, a license free kernal, and then just build a proprietary app on top and viola, a robust and reliable product that's easy to write to software-wise (using C and other well documented standards), and allows a fairly good profit margin from the start if they win the contract. Unix is dying or just about dead for the license reason. Don't get me started on NMCI. Everyone, and I mean EVERYONE in the military hates it (totally inflexible to the ever changing needs we have). EDS is being investigated by the FTC, and if the military is lucky, won't get their NMCI contract renewed in 2007. Microsoft will remain the desktop of choice as long as DoD continues to bankroll DELL into continued high profits. This will also keep INTEL in the black as well due to DELLs inability to see the value in AMD and other processors. It's become too easy for our purchase agents to just hit the MS/DELL/INTEL "buy" button. Until this changes, we'll be stuck with their stuff whether we like it our not.
Concur...don't use any of the addons in either my Win2k box or XP box. In fact, I'm mostly using OSS on both for most of my work and just downloaded the SUSE 9.2 Pro from the web. Since I'm already familiar with the latest OSS, I'm planning on taking the plung with the OS as well.
So the question I've been dying to find out from all the high def zealots out there is... does making a high definition recording of something originally recorded in some other definition (in this case celluloid) going to look "better"? It's been my experience dealing with image processing of "analog" imagery that the higher up in resolution you go, the more "anomolies" can be detected...i.e. there is only so much you can do with the original baseline, and going up in resolution requires huge amounts of post processing to clean up those anomolies. AAANNND the final product is still limited by the originals. So even if we get more lines of resolution from the celluloid, the celluloid is still the limit on how good you can go. So will high def DVD STAR WARS look better than standard DVD STAR WARS. Probably, but not any better than the original and not THAT much better than standard DVD.
I think the movie industry (and music too) have lost the fact that we aren't clamoring for higer resolutions of our recorded media, we just want ones that don't wear out. That's why I think SACD and DVD-A haven't taken off.
You obviously don't know anything about defense acquisition, and the priorities set out by DoD and the services. The services spend close to 60% of their budget paying for their people. Salaries, medical benefits, retirement, etc. The other 40% has to cover everything else, from the bombs that are dropped to the fuel that is burned. The military is trying to find any way they can to save money and make more of that 40% go towards updating equipment that's often 30 years old, and reducing the manning requirments of their equipment to reduce the percentage I stated above.
If you got them to spring $4400 for Pro/E, you obviously pulled the wool over somebody's eyes who didn't know better. Looks like a prime opportunity for me to call the waste, fraud and abuse hotline on you and the acquisition bubba who purchased it for you.
Last I heard the military is losing out to commercial interests as well. They're losing out on new freqs for expanded comms and radar to commercial interests. Main reason...government agencies are forbidden to lobby other government agencies. In the end the military is fighting for the scraps as well since they can't "contribute" (cough, cough) to the FCC's decision making process the way corporations can.
What you're talking about is thermal blooming. It is a serious effect that has to be taken into consideration if the laser is the reach any useful range. Thermal blooming changes the index of refraction of the air, changing the laser propagation through it. Heating the air until it ionizes (contrails are doubtful) would take a long time however, and would require the air to remain perfectly still to do so. Also, the wavelengths chosen are based on the "windows" available in the atmostphere. There are several depending on wavelength and that info can be easily found on the internet since there are numerous non-military uses for that information as well (e.g. astronomy).
Some specs listed here: http://members.rogers.com/biglasers/continuous/the l.html
I'm sorry, how can you say rewritten exactly when you use too assumptions A>>B and a Taylor expansion to approximate the answer. This is contradictory. The two methods you described simplify the system and make it less "exact" since it uses approximations. However, reduced mass is a decent way to solve this analytically, but to get better answers computers solve the non-simplified equations numerically.
It's not, that's the beauty of pulsed power. What really should have been stated was the joules of energy the system will be imparting on the small pellet of Hydrogen isotope. Energy per square centimeter would be a much better measure, since watts depends on time and shorter time can give larger watts.... 1 watt = 1 joule/sec.
DUUUUHHHH...I had half a dozen IT people ask me if they should buy into the new MS license scheme two years ago. After evaluating just what they had, to each an every one I said NO. These people are laughing about it now and have learned to not take MS too seriously when they "threaten" with new license schemes. The track record of this company is clear and it is, and always has been readily apparent that you will lose money in the long run with their license schemes. Now that new product turn out has spread to 4+ years, buying brand new, if you even need to, is going to be a better investment when compared to the yearly MS license.
I've laughed at a lot of these, but folks the Navy has been using chat for some time between ships underway at sea to conduct administrative type communications and for general questions. They DO NOT us it for dictating operational orders or policy. This is still done via voice communications and "official message traffic" (teletype style message in proper formatting released by the designated commander). So all you folks worried about soldiers getting their heads blown off by poor translation can breath easy...that type of info isn't passed via this method, even between our own troops who speak the same language.
Relax folks, your DVD investment will be good for many years to come. Resampling the same 23fps film at higher resolutions won't show much difference so the old movies won't gain much from this. For the audiophiles out there, sampling at 96kHz is great, but most people experience 44kHz CDs and these are good enough. High Definition DVDs whatever format will only show marked improvement when the source material is also High Def. High Def recording equipment is just now getting limited use, and the film makers are just starting to use it as well. They aren't there yet and neither will HD-DVDs for quite some time. What does this all mean...it means your existing collection will look fantastic with a progressive scan DVD player and a digital or HD television, now chill out and enjoy your deCSS'd movies okay.
Slashdot Mirror
So what they're really saying is..... yadda, yadda, yadda....we don't know what the hell is going on with the universe...everytime we think we do we find something new that throws us all for a loop.... No big surprise....can't believe the astrophysics community takes any "hard data" about the universe seriously since the limitions of what we are able to observe and comprehend right now are staggering...we're just at the very beggining of understanding the universe and it's underlying mechanism....let's quit trying to make bold statments about it's age and "dark matter" when we barely have a clue about it at all... I swear this community has as many "politicians" wrangling for prestige and power as the government does....
The thing that needs to happen most is to pull back the length of copyright term to something more reasonable. Clearly the current term breeds excessive complacency in the bulk of copyright producers. I'd like to see a study (I'm sure some have been done already) that shows how the overall average of producers of copyright material start with a lot of material (or a singular big effort), then basically produce nothing very quickly afterward, and just rest on their copyrights to provide them their subsistence. This runs counter to the reason for copyright and is explicitly stated in the Constitution as such. Copyright is supposed to stimulate additional progress of science and the useful arts, but if producers of copyright follow the trend of "resting on their terms", then we are in a state of counter productivity with copyright and in violation of the constitutional language intent. I keep seeing the Disney case brought up as an example of this and what keeps me scratching my head about Disney's big props for extension of copyright is that they continue to refine "the mouse" with new copyrighted material over an over again anyway. I can't understand their fear of the original Mickey Mouse material expiring if they continue to produce new stuff (with brand new copyright terms) that brings in new revenues. Disney is one of the big companies that, because they keep coming out with new stuff, is least of all affected by their old copyrights expiring. The only thing they have to worry about is putting out material that nobody wants, which is a risk all companies have regardless of product. They have a few old classic movies that may not make them money anymore, but that's not where their big money comes from anyway.
Come on folks. I think we've all come to the conclusion that ICE is on it's way out and additional tweaking doesn't solve the problem, just delays the impact. Rather than sink a bunch of money, time and effort into this, we should be sinking money, time and effort into designs that eliminate burning oil products and eliminate emissions entirely. We have working models and prototypes of these types of systems already, why would we need to build another prototype of an "old" model. Doesn't make any sense. I hope this guys gets his funding cut.
Blah, blah, blah...in other news we have the same stories with different names and countries regarding bloodshed, human rights violations, corruption and many others we've seen for the last three millenia. Microsoft's delays along with the rest of these stories should NOT be shocking to anybody anymore...
Great, now we can re-purchase all of our A/V equipment and movies so we can see all those film artifacts in High Definition. There's going to be nothing quite like having the big black blotches coming to your screen in 720P and up...as well as the original analog audio scores that are going to be giving you a high fidelity tape hiss along with that blotched up screen. Higher resolutions of cruddy productions will just give us high resolution crud!
I'm all for everyone having their say with regard to their opinions. But I have a hard time with this when reading about claims that can't hold water or anything else for that matter. The fact is you can run current kernals on older hardware with slimmed down services and apps running on top of the Linux kernal. Don't see any product from Microsoft that can do or claim this today for x86 PC hardware. This is the claim from the Linux community and it is been substantiated over and over again by the broader computing community for quite some time now. We guarantee Microsoft Free as in speech, but when are they going to guarantee what they say is actually true and factual?
Funny, I don't see anyone from the international community jumping to our aid. When the tsunami hit Indonesia, people were screaming at the U.S. to "give, give, give". Now that we've had our own "tsunami", where's the comeback. The oil rich countries are making a killing this year on the U.S. buying it price gouging oil, where's the damn help? Next time someone has a problem, I say go F*&% YOURSELF, international community.
Been waiting around for somebody to come up with something really inovative in the Fusion field of study to shake things up a bit. Been beating the magnetically confined setup for decades and it's still a big if. ITER will pump multi-billions into something that still won't see a pay-off, even if they manage to get beyond break-even and maybe even see ignition. Laser pulse inerital confinement is way too power intesive as well. My big question is, can we extract any heat from the damn thing??? If we can't, so much for heating the water to spin the turbine and generator.
It has been beta tested and gone gold and so far it's track record has been much better than MS Windows, and every other OS or software App I'm aware of. It's only crashed twice over 25 years of service in THE most demanding environment imaginable. Show me another system (software or otherwise) that's had this track record over the Shuttle's current and projected longevity?
I'm waiting for the headline that shows that people are using FOSS more and more and because of that the "piracy" rate is decreasing. Except for my OS, everything is use now is FOSS.
Looking at the design of the shuttle we have three major components. The tank, the SRB's and the orbiter itself. We've had catastrophic failures of the orbiter due to the failures of the SRB's and the tank. Are we biding our time until the orbiter is the primary cause? When are we going to finally get to a simpler design? All the major unmanned missions we launch are upgrading their systems to more robust and newer designs that use simpler configurations (which are usually more reliable). The shuttle has provided a great service, but it's time to leverage it's lessons learned and more forward.
Is that usq-70 or uyq-70???
Work in the research and development area of the military and can tell you that OSS is prevelant everywhere. If you look at the venders the military is asking to build it's products you will see if you can dig deep enough linux kernals in many of the systems. Primary reason...they can use COTS hardware, a license free kernal, and then just build a proprietary app on top and viola, a robust and reliable product that's easy to write to software-wise (using C and other well documented standards), and allows a fairly good profit margin from the start if they win the contract. Unix is dying or just about dead for the license reason. Don't get me started on NMCI. Everyone, and I mean EVERYONE in the military hates it (totally inflexible to the ever changing needs we have). EDS is being investigated by the FTC, and if the military is lucky, won't get their NMCI contract renewed in 2007. Microsoft will remain the desktop of choice as long as DoD continues to bankroll DELL into continued high profits. This will also keep INTEL in the black as well due to DELLs inability to see the value in AMD and other processors. It's become too easy for our purchase agents to just hit the MS/DELL/INTEL "buy" button. Until this changes, we'll be stuck with their stuff whether we like it our not.
Concur...don't use any of the addons in either my Win2k box or XP box. In fact, I'm mostly using OSS on both for most of my work and just downloaded the SUSE 9.2 Pro from the web. Since I'm already familiar with the latest OSS, I'm planning on taking the plung with the OS as well.
So the question I've been dying to find out from all the high def zealots out there is... does making a high definition recording of something originally recorded in some other definition (in this case celluloid) going to look "better"? It's been my experience dealing with image processing of "analog" imagery that the higher up in resolution you go, the more "anomolies" can be detected...i.e. there is only so much you can do with the original baseline, and going up in resolution requires huge amounts of post processing to clean up those anomolies. AAANNND the final product is still limited by the originals. So even if we get more lines of resolution from the celluloid, the celluloid is still the limit on how good you can go. So will high def DVD STAR WARS look better than standard DVD STAR WARS. Probably, but not any better than the original and not THAT much better than standard DVD. I think the movie industry (and music too) have lost the fact that we aren't clamoring for higer resolutions of our recorded media, we just want ones that don't wear out. That's why I think SACD and DVD-A haven't taken off.
"Saving a little money isn't a high priority."
You obviously don't know anything about defense acquisition, and the priorities set out by DoD and the services. The services spend close to 60% of their budget paying for their people. Salaries, medical benefits, retirement, etc. The other 40% has to cover everything else, from the bombs that are dropped to the fuel that is burned. The military is trying to find any way they can to save money and make more of that 40% go towards updating equipment that's often 30 years old, and reducing the manning requirments of their equipment to reduce the percentage I stated above.
If you got them to spring $4400 for Pro/E, you obviously pulled the wool over somebody's eyes who didn't know better. Looks like a prime opportunity for me to call the waste, fraud and abuse hotline on you and the acquisition bubba who purchased it for you.
Last I heard the military is losing out to commercial interests as well. They're losing out on new freqs for expanded comms and radar to commercial interests. Main reason...government agencies are forbidden to lobby other government agencies. In the end the military is fighting for the scraps as well since they can't "contribute" (cough, cough) to the FCC's decision making process the way corporations can.
What you're talking about is thermal blooming. It is a serious effect that has to be taken into consideration if the laser is the reach any useful range. Thermal blooming changes the index of refraction of the air, changing the laser propagation through it. Heating the air until it ionizes (contrails are doubtful) would take a long time however, and would require the air to remain perfectly still to do so. Also, the wavelengths chosen are based on the "windows" available in the atmostphere. There are several depending on wavelength and that info can be easily found on the internet since there are numerous non-military uses for that information as well (e.g. astronomy). Some specs listed here: http://members.rogers.com/biglasers/continuous/the l.html
She looks like she's had a good mod job done as well, and fits in with the car nicely!
I'm sorry, how can you say rewritten exactly when you use too assumptions A>>B and a Taylor expansion to approximate the answer. This is contradictory. The two methods you described simplify the system and make it less "exact" since it uses approximations. However, reduced mass is a decent way to solve this analytically, but to get better answers computers solve the non-simplified equations numerically.
It's not, that's the beauty of pulsed power. What really should have been stated was the joules of energy the system will be imparting on the small pellet of Hydrogen isotope. Energy per square centimeter would be a much better measure, since watts depends on time and shorter time can give larger watts.... 1 watt = 1 joule/sec.
DUUUUHHHH...I had half a dozen IT people ask me if they should buy into the new MS license scheme two years ago. After evaluating just what they had, to each an every one I said NO. These people are laughing about it now and have learned to not take MS too seriously when they "threaten" with new license schemes. The track record of this company is clear and it is, and always has been readily apparent that you will lose money in the long run with their license schemes. Now that new product turn out has spread to 4+ years, buying brand new, if you even need to, is going to be a better investment when compared to the yearly MS license.
I've laughed at a lot of these, but folks the Navy has been using chat for some time between ships underway at sea to conduct administrative type communications and for general questions. They DO NOT us it for dictating operational orders or policy. This is still done via voice communications and "official message traffic" (teletype style message in proper formatting released by the designated commander). So all you folks worried about soldiers getting their heads blown off by poor translation can breath easy...that type of info isn't passed via this method, even between our own troops who speak the same language.
Relax folks, your DVD investment will be good for many years to come. Resampling the same 23fps film at higher resolutions won't show much difference so the old movies won't gain much from this. For the audiophiles out there, sampling at 96kHz is great, but most people experience 44kHz CDs and these are good enough. High Definition DVDs whatever format will only show marked improvement when the source material is also High Def. High Def recording equipment is just now getting limited use, and the film makers are just starting to use it as well. They aren't there yet and neither will HD-DVDs for quite some time. What does this all mean...it means your existing collection will look fantastic with a progressive scan DVD player and a digital or HD television, now chill out and enjoy your deCSS'd movies okay.