Matlab is not the fastest way to solve a problem. However it runs reasonably fast. The thing it has going for it for scientific work is that it is easy to understand. It's almost a high enough level language that the equations are the algorithm. The professors at my university are involved in a variety of subjects from control theory to atmospheric research, and they all use matlab and IDL. very rarely resorting to fortran or C. Those are very good languages, but it's difficult to describe complex functions and still have legible code. More importantly, programming in matlab or IDL is much quicker than fortran and C, most likely because of their more mathematically oriented structure and abundance of scientific libraries. If it has to be high performance, they'll use a lower level language, but you can bet they tested the algorithm on a smaller scale with matlab.
Serious scientists use whatever the best tool for the job is. Whether it's Matlab, Fortan, C, IDL, or even perl. (One of the better known magnetohydrodynamic models is programmed in Fortran with some perl glue thrown in if i remember) I haven't met anyone that uses java or.net, but that doesn't mean it's not used.
The only downside is that many of the people using Matlab and similar are not primarily programmers so the code can get sloppy.
When considering density you must also consider the pressure. The earth for instance is denser than its composition would be at sea level because of the tremendous forces resultant from its own mass.
It is suspected that the core of jupiter is metallic hydrogen, a phase that occurs only at extreme pressures.
As an aside: The earth is also a net "producer" of energy if you look at luminosity alone. All of the energy from solar radiation must be radiated away or we'd become very hot very quick. In fact, it's a bit worse than that since some heat is also escaping from the core. Evidence: volcanoes. so the total amount of energy leaving the earth as light must therefore be greater than the total amout of energy intercepted by earth as light.
I think most of us would agree that the earth is not "generating" heat, but rather just slowly dissipating the heat that's already there. from the formation of Earth. Io on the other hand is generating heat (or rather heat is being generated as a result of jupiter's tidal forces.)
To further butcher your analogy, Imagine that your awesome new ford mustang GT is only capable of driving in cities and on highways. It is incapable of driving on rural roads for some reason or another (clearance?) Your old escort did fine in the rural areas, but wasn't as fast as your new car could be under ideal circumstances.
The question to ask is: Is deorbit significantly cheaper than reboost and repair. In other words, do not consider the whole cost of the mission to hubble, only the difference between deorbiting and upgrade/reboost is relevant, since the base cost of deorbit would have to be spent either way. Unless you're willing to take the (admittedly small) chance of hubble landing in a populated area.
I thought discussing godwin's law invokes godwin's law. Thus making this post self-referential and invalid. But if it's invalid then it isn't... error..error..
All of those "improvements" were in the first "Tribes." at the same time, "Battlezone II" some as well as having the 2d strat element. Both of which continue to be superior in every way (except level of detail) to the Halo Series. (Tribes also has a version of 2d strategy, but its not as integral as battlezone) Let me know when Halo introduces rechargeable jetpacks and realistic physics on projectiles.
I was really looking forward to the Halo I launch, based mostly on screenshots. Until they delayed the launch two years, migrated to the Xbox, and made the graphics similar to (but slightly more detailed than) the 007 series on N64.
BTW, Quake I had grenades on a separately bound key and melee attacks. (remember the grenade+rocket jumping?) (We both show our age by our attributions of these innovations)
NASA is not going to launch another shuttle. They're just going to play the "One more thing" game 'till everyone gets bored with it and gives up. Even when the shuttles were working it was nearly impossible to plan a vacation around it: you'd wait on the intercoastal for 5 hours with your scanner listenening to rebroadcast NASA transmission only to have the launch scrubbed when the 2-minute hold goes into the launch window.
The moral is: never plan your trip around a shuttle launch. An atlas or titan launch, that's another story - you can get a bit closer since they're launched from canaveral rather than kennedy - though they delay those as well.
Florida Today has good coverage of spacey things. Scan the pages for upcoming launches. It's too bad you won't be in town on May 11. There's a delta 2 launch.
The numbers are closer than you'd think, and in the senate, the Dems rule. By your logic, senate democrates are therefore more dishonest than senate republicans, but this is made up for by the dishonesty of house republicans.
If he thinks he'd enjoy either one, and just wants to decide based on the money, what's wrong with that? everyone's gotta eat. Moreover, like many people, he may want to do something others find useful.
Who says you can't enjoy painting AND painting targets?
Why do they convert to a global projection at all? shouldn't the raw images be sufficient to describe the terrain directly below the satellite from the pov of directly above that terrain? If anything, they should be using a spherical projection since it's unlikely there will be significant curvature in the small portion you would be looking at at any time.
I wish they would make simple devices that interconnect well. Like putting a "standard cellphone dock" on your ipod so you can download songs from itunes. Or the same for your PDA to download email or sync addresses. Or a iPod-PDA interconnect to let you use it as an external hard drive.
Blinking yellow and blinking red do not mean the same thing as solid yellow and solid red. which is why they are blinking. If yellow didn't mean stop, why would there be blinking yellow for "proceed with caution" and blinking red for "stop, then proceed with caution"?
There is a misconception that (in the US) yellow means proceed with caution. When in fact it means (stop the car dumbass, the light's about to turn red) It's there to give a buffer between when the stop is announced and when it's official (because there are some values of position and velocity which would be dangerous to reduce to zero before the light). It most certainly does NOT mean gun it.
If there were a malicious program that erased drives, wouldn't it make sense to start with the high drives and leave the system stuff until the end to maximize the damage done?
AFAIK, the only real bottleneck to such a program is the delivery mechanism. Is there a way to get messenger to run arbitrary code? If so, the existance of a similar program is not only possible, but in fact, likely.
I don't believe this story is real but i can offer no evidence to substantiate my belief. Besides, surely no one would be stupid enough to believe their victim will leave the doors unlocked after a request.
Great. people that didn't pay attention in drivers ed. class. (Sorry to you non USAians where it may be different) YELLOW means stop. If you're going too fast to safely execute a stop, then you are allowed to continue.
(I know that's a nitpick but if people actually heeded drivers ed. instead of sleeping through it, maybe it wouldn't be safer to strap a rocket pack to your arse and fly around the sears tower than to drive there from four miles away.)
Eventually it comes down to about four or five "strategies" for each character class, which can then be put into a macro and activated with one button.
Note also that doing interesting things like using the terrain and certain "spells" to achieve impossible results as a natural consequence of the game physics is often called "using an exploit" and as it is against the designers (limited) imagination of what gameplay should be, the spell or piece o' physics is eliminated/vastly crippled to get rid of the effect. (This results in a more 'fair' game to be sure, but it also results in more monotony as well)
real life: What was that? Oh that's neat. I wonder what we can do with it.
virtual life: What was that? Oh that's neat. Hey its not happening anymore. Time to grind some more.
The designers can make it as varied as possible, but there is a fundamental limit: there are vastly more users than designers. So it's bound to get repetative at some point. (not to mention that discovery occurs much more rapidly and with considerably less effort than creation) Perhaps you could get a more dynamic and interesting environment by finding a way to include the users AS designers, but ultimately, these games detract from real physical interraction and so are the online equivalent of cocaine.
If I patent a machine for producing PBJ's, and you see the patent, are you allowed to copy my machine for your own personal use? or are you restricted from using the knowledge in my patent altogether? (disregard the possibility that armitron may be prior work)
But these games aren't actually fun... (Well maybe for the first 15 minutes when everything is new to you) They're repetitive, formulaic, and specifically designed to get you addicted: Hmm, if i level for just one more hour, i can get the sword of cunning and then leveling will be much more fun..except it won't because you'll be fighting harder baddies. You get locked into a cycle of leveling to beat harder badguys, and therefore being introduced to ever harder badguys.
In the end it's never more complicated than walking up to the baddie and pressing two or three fire-buttons and watching your sword wack away. Why not let people who don't have months to spend on A GAME skip by the boring parts if they want to. i.e. farming for money so you can buy a slightly better weapon.
oh yeah? well how many people has the ESA put on the moon and successfully brought back? Trust ESA to be overly cautious in the face of exciting possibilities.
You know Abercrombie used to be an actual outfitter before becoming the faux outfitter mall wart... I really hope the same thing doesn't happen to EMS.
afaik, canon puts most of the control circuitry in the lenses themselves whereas other manufacturers put this in the camera body. This has the effect of making the canon lenses more expensive (but the bodies should be a bit cheaper). One would expect that this would make backwards compatability (new lens, old body) less of an issue for canon, whereas other manufacturers can only go the other way. (you want a new lens? you gotta buy the latest body - or make sure to get compatable lenses) Though there are probably some additinal cost benefits to the dumb-lens design as it allows for some interroperability between manufacturers.
So the question is: do the bodies "wear out" and require frequent replacing? Or do new lenses come out that need the latest controls? What's the limiting factor here that would justify one or the other?
IANAPP (professional photographer) - speaking as a canon owner: film SLR, briefly had a consumer grade digital, also had a sony digital.. (I will never buy sony cameras again. They must spend all their money on the form-factor and just shoehorn some plastic lenses and a noisy ccd into it)
Explain how, looking at the package, you could tell that the $.10 one is really any better than the $.09 one and not just charging $.01 more because they can. If you can't tell the difference in quality, then price is the only metric left to go on.
Slashdot Mirror
Matlab is not the fastest way to solve a problem. However it runs reasonably fast. The thing it has going for it for scientific work is that it is easy to understand. It's almost a high enough level language that the equations are the algorithm. The professors at my university are involved in a variety of subjects from control theory to atmospheric research, and they all use matlab and IDL. very rarely resorting to fortran or C. Those are very good languages, but it's difficult to describe complex functions and still have legible code. More importantly, programming in matlab or IDL is much quicker than fortran and C, most likely because of their more mathematically oriented structure and abundance of scientific libraries. If it has to be high performance, they'll use a lower level language, but you can bet they tested the algorithm on a smaller scale with matlab.
.net, but that doesn't mean it's not used.
Serious scientists use whatever the best tool for the job is. Whether it's Matlab, Fortan, C, IDL, or even perl. (One of the better known magnetohydrodynamic models is programmed in Fortran with some perl glue thrown in if i remember) I haven't met anyone that uses java or
The only downside is that many of the people using Matlab and similar are not primarily programmers so the code can get sloppy.
When considering density you must also consider the pressure. The earth for instance is denser than its composition would be at sea level because of the tremendous forces resultant from its own mass.
It is suspected that the core of jupiter is metallic hydrogen, a phase that occurs only at extreme pressures.
As an aside: The earth is also a net "producer" of energy if you look at luminosity alone. All of the energy from solar radiation must be radiated away or we'd become very hot very quick. In fact, it's a bit worse than that since some heat is also escaping from the core. Evidence: volcanoes. so the total amount of energy leaving the earth as light must therefore be greater than the total amout of energy intercepted by earth as light.
I think most of us would agree that the earth is not "generating" heat, but rather just slowly dissipating the heat that's already there. from the formation of Earth. Io on the other hand is generating heat (or rather heat is being generated as a result of jupiter's tidal forces.)
To further butcher your analogy, Imagine that your awesome new ford mustang GT is only capable of driving in cities and on highways. It is incapable of driving on rural roads for some reason or another (clearance?) Your old escort did fine in the rural areas, but wasn't as fast as your new car could be under ideal circumstances.
The question to ask is: Is deorbit significantly cheaper than reboost and repair. In other words, do not consider the whole cost of the mission to hubble, only the difference between deorbiting and upgrade/reboost is relevant, since the base cost of deorbit would have to be spent either way. Unless you're willing to take the (admittedly small) chance of hubble landing in a populated area.
The exact same number of letters?
I thought discussing godwin's law invokes godwin's law. Thus making this post self-referential and invalid. But if it's invalid then it isn't...
error..error..
All of those "improvements" were in the first "Tribes." at the same time, "Battlezone II" some as well as having the 2d strat element. Both of which continue to be superior in every way (except level of detail) to the Halo Series.
(Tribes also has a version of 2d strategy, but its not as integral as battlezone) Let me know when Halo introduces rechargeable jetpacks and realistic physics on projectiles.
I was really looking forward to the Halo I launch, based mostly on screenshots. Until they delayed the launch two years, migrated to the Xbox, and made the graphics similar to (but slightly more detailed than) the 007 series on N64.
BTW, Quake I had grenades on a separately bound key and melee attacks. (remember the grenade+rocket jumping?) (We both show our age by our attributions of these innovations)
NASA is not going to launch another shuttle. They're just going to play the "One more thing" game 'till everyone gets bored with it and gives up. Even when the shuttles were working it was nearly impossible to plan a vacation around it: you'd wait on the intercoastal for 5 hours with your scanner listenening to rebroadcast NASA transmission only to have the launch scrubbed when the 2-minute hold goes into the launch window.
The moral is: never plan your trip around a shuttle launch. An atlas or titan launch, that's another story - you can get a bit closer since they're launched from canaveral rather than kennedy - though they delay those as well.
Florida Today has good coverage of spacey things. Scan the pages for upcoming launches. It's too bad you won't be in town on May 11. There's a delta 2 launch.
The numbers are closer than you'd think, and in the senate, the Dems rule. By your logic, senate democrates are therefore more dishonest than senate republicans, but this is made up for by the dishonesty of house republicans.
e =2004&type=R
http://www.opensecrets.org/parties/index.asp?cycl
why do they even need gps? can't they just route off of which tower is handling the call?
If he thinks he'd enjoy either one, and just wants to decide based on the money, what's wrong with that? everyone's gotta eat. Moreover, like many people, he may want to do something others find useful.
Who says you can't enjoy painting AND painting targets?
Why do they convert to a global projection at all? shouldn't the raw images be sufficient to describe the terrain directly below the satellite from the pov of directly above that terrain? If anything, they should be using a spherical projection since it's unlikely there will be significant curvature in the small portion you would be looking at at any time.
I wish they would make simple devices that interconnect well. Like putting a "standard cellphone dock" on your ipod so you can download songs from itunes. Or the same for your PDA to download email or sync addresses. Or a iPod-PDA interconnect to let you use it as an external hard drive.
Blinking yellow and blinking red do not mean the same thing as solid yellow and solid red. which is why they are blinking. If yellow didn't mean stop, why would there be blinking yellow for "proceed with caution" and blinking red for "stop, then proceed with caution"?
There is a misconception that (in the US) yellow means proceed with caution. When in fact it means (stop the car dumbass, the light's about to turn red) It's there to give a buffer between when the stop is announced and when it's official (because there are some values of position and velocity which would be dangerous to reduce to zero before the light). It most certainly does NOT mean gun it.
If there were a malicious program that erased drives, wouldn't it make sense to start with the high drives and leave the system stuff until the end to maximize the damage done?
AFAIK, the only real bottleneck to such a program is the delivery mechanism. Is there a way to get messenger to run arbitrary code? If so, the existance of a similar program is not only possible, but in fact, likely.
I don't believe this story is real but i can offer no evidence to substantiate my belief. Besides, surely no one would be stupid enough to believe their victim will leave the doors unlocked after a request.
Great. people that didn't pay attention in drivers ed. class. (Sorry to you non USAians where it may be different) YELLOW means stop. If you're going too fast to safely execute a stop, then you are allowed to continue.
(I know that's a nitpick but if people actually heeded drivers ed. instead of sleeping through it, maybe it wouldn't be safer to strap a rocket pack to your arse and fly around the sears tower than to drive there from four miles away.)
Eventually it comes down to about four or five "strategies" for each character class, which can then be put into a macro and activated with one button.
Note also that doing interesting things like using the terrain and certain "spells" to achieve impossible results as a natural consequence of the game physics is often called "using an exploit" and as it is against the designers (limited) imagination of what gameplay should be, the spell or piece o' physics is eliminated/vastly crippled to get rid of the effect. (This results in a more 'fair' game to be sure, but it also results in more monotony as well)
real life: What was that? Oh that's neat. I wonder what we can do with it.
virtual life: What was that? Oh that's neat. Hey its not happening anymore. Time to grind some more.
The designers can make it as varied as possible, but there is a fundamental limit: there are vastly more users than designers. So it's bound to get repetative at some point. (not to mention that discovery occurs much more rapidly and with considerably less effort than creation) Perhaps you could get a more dynamic and interesting environment by finding a way to include the users AS designers, but ultimately, these games detract from real physical interraction and so are the online equivalent of cocaine.
If I patent a machine for producing PBJ's, and you see the patent, are you allowed to copy my machine for your own personal use? or are you restricted from using the knowledge in my patent altogether? (disregard the possibility that armitron may be prior work)
But these games aren't actually fun... (Well maybe for the first 15 minutes when everything is new to you) They're repetitive, formulaic, and specifically designed to get you addicted: Hmm, if i level for just one more hour, i can get the sword of cunning and then leveling will be much more fun..except it won't because you'll be fighting harder baddies. You get locked into a cycle of leveling to beat harder badguys, and therefore being introduced to ever harder badguys.
In the end it's never more complicated than walking up to the baddie and pressing two or three fire-buttons and watching your sword wack away. Why not let people who don't have months to spend on A GAME skip by the boring parts if they want to. i.e. farming for money so you can buy a slightly better weapon.
oh yeah? well how many people has the ESA put on the moon and successfully brought back? Trust ESA to be overly cautious in the face of exciting possibilities.
You're right. He should have made her buy the popcorn.
What about taxes? do you get a rebate cheque from the state as well?
hmm.. Rebates may be a scam, but the chief beneficiary may be the state!
You know Abercrombie used to be an actual outfitter before becoming the faux outfitter mall wart... I really hope the same thing doesn't happen to EMS.
afaik, canon puts most of the control circuitry in the lenses themselves whereas other manufacturers put this in the camera body. This has the effect of making the canon lenses more expensive (but the bodies should be a bit cheaper). One would expect that this would make backwards compatability (new lens, old body) less of an issue for canon, whereas other manufacturers can only go the other way. (you want a new lens? you gotta buy the latest body - or make sure to get compatable lenses) Though there are probably some additinal cost benefits to the dumb-lens design as it allows for some interroperability between manufacturers.
So the question is: do the bodies "wear out" and require frequent replacing? Or do new lenses come out that need the latest controls? What's the limiting factor here that would justify one or the other?
IANAPP (professional photographer)
- speaking as a canon owner: film SLR, briefly had a consumer grade digital, also had a sony digital.. (I will never buy sony cameras again. They must spend all their money on the form-factor and just shoehorn some plastic lenses and a noisy ccd into it)
does that count as one of his senses? like smision?
Explain how, looking at the package, you could tell that the $.10 one is really any better than the $.09 one and not just charging $.01 more because they can. If you can't tell the difference in quality, then price is the only metric left to go on.