You're right.
"Thrust was observed on both test articles, even though one of the test articles was designed with the expectation that it would not produce thrust. Specifically, one test article contained internal physical modifications that were designed to produce thrust, while the other did not (with the latter being referred to as the "null" test article)."
Also: "within a stainless steel vacuum chamber with the door closed but at ambient atmospheric pressure"
I think maybe they made one of these:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
+1 for JavaScript. You can absolutely learn the fundamentals of programming from it. Learn about variables, control structures, functions, arrays and simple objects. Learn how to interact with the DOM.
Once you're comfortable with those then move on to a more sophisticated language and learn the principles of OOP. Javascript's prototype based inheritance is not the place to learn OOP.
Why do you work for a company who's products you don't use? Is the app too expensive, or just not something that is suited to your life?
Frankly if neither you nor your colleagues use a product your company created, why does the company think anyone will use it?
If the product is good, but you just don't have a use for it, I don't see any ethical issues in promoting it. But if it's simply not a good product then I would probably not promote it, after all it's your personal reputation that is at stake. I'd also start looking for another job.
Start a campaign here:
www.mycharitywater.org
Or just make a flat donation:
www.charitywater.org
100% of the money you donate goes to the field. They get their operations money from other sources.
Lack of potable water is probably the most significant problem humanity faces. Solving this issue could bring millions of people out of poverty.
I have to say, that sounds like an excellent idea. I wouldn't be surprised if something like what you are suggesting is developed some day. There were supposed to be ground penetrating devices deployed on one of the earlier probes. Very similar in concept to what you are suggesting. I believe it was the polar lander? Sorry, to tired and lazy to google.
You are either lying, repeating a lie that was told to you, or the people at the Apple store were having fun with you. In any case nothing about what you wrote is true.
Excellent work and Congratulations! It is a beautiful movie, I would love to see more like this. I really think that this is the type of thing that can get people excited about space exploration. Will you be able to capture any more of these on subsequent flyby's? Will you be capturing the Moon at all. How about one for the Mercury approach?
It would be remarkable to capture an entire voyage in this manner, from liftoff to arrival. I realize that the technical challenges might be quite daunting, and I'm sure it would have questionable scientific value, but it would certainly be an amazing thing to behold. The closest I would ever get to witnessing it first hand.
Keep up the great work!
I'm willing to bet that the side effects of this will be that a super bug (like antibiotic resistant staph) will emerge that will wipe out large numbers of crocodiles.
What kind of "value" are you looking for? If you want there to be a practical application then you will be disappointed. The major significance is that if verified, this would be the first finding of liquid on the surface of another body in the solar system.
If confirmed it would imply that liquids on the surface of planets and moons could be common in solar systems like ours.
You are correct in assuming that it is not water. It's hard to imagine a scenario where liquid water could exist on the surface of Titan.
I don't think that this lake will be useful to mankind for a very long time if ever, but the implications are important, thought provoking, and help people who study these things improve their theories and models. I find this valuable, others may be looking for something more tangible
Both are false. JavaScript is a prototype-based language, which means it's as OO as a langugae can get. JavaScript is as OO as Smalltalk, Self, and Ruby, and moreso than Python, Java or C++.
While I agree completely with the sentiment of the rest of your post. I have to sort of disagree with this line.
One thing javascript is sorely missing is the ability to create and broadcast custom events from custom objects. This makes it difficult if not impossible to create object oriented applications using MVC and many other OOP design patterns.
What you say really goes to the heart of the matter. Art can be defined as a sharing of the vision of an artist and the viewer. This is why a Kubrick film is more artful than say the evening news. Both communicate, one lays bare for you the mind and soul of it's creator. Art seeks to transcend the barrier that separates individuals by delivering emotion and truth via one or all of our senses... Renaissance art was obsessed with beauty because this was to them an evocation of truth, but art does not have to be beautiful, modern art is obsessed with politics (detrimental in my mind) Every college student does that condom sculpture eventually. The intent is to share a vision, spread a message, be evocative. A computer cannot, to this day, do these things and therefore computer generated objects, or images cannot be art even if they are attractive.
I don't think that the differences that you hear are from it's spinning, I thought that too at first but then I realized that it would be a gradual increase and decrease, more like a sin wave than what you hear here.
Can't someone come up with a Snow Crash joke/reference. We're already 40 posts into this story and no one has mentioned it yet. What is slashdot coming to?
I have to say that I think you are wrong about the faster, cheaper, better philosophy being horribly wrong. It may not have been executed exceedingly well, but it did have some huge payoffs. If it weren't for faster cheaper better (smarter?) We probably would have only had one other Mars probe since the viking missions. Instead, we have a couple of orbiters and 3 mobile landers. The cost of these together has not even come close to the cost of one viking style probe. The philosophy behind faster, cheaper, smarter allowed for failures, the idea was you would spend 3 billion on a series of probes (instead of one), you can do them every two years (instead of every 10) and if you lose one you don't lose everything. I think that contrary to what you suggest the faster cheaper better philosophy has contributed a great deal to our understanding of Mars and not set us back 5 years. like this
We treat our children like criminals, it's no wonder that the US is the most incarcerated country in the world. People grow up behind bars so prison does not seem like a punishment. One of the high schools near me was actually designed by an architect who was a designer of prisons.
And another thing... aren't we training our children to accept big brother? If they are tracked by RFD every day for 12 years will they not find it acceptable in college, in their workplace?
It seems that everyday we give a little bit more of our humanity away.
"There is only an up or down. Up to man's age-old dream -- the maximum of individual freedom consistent with order -- or down to the ant heap of totalitarianism. Regardless of their sincerity, their humanitarian motives, those who would sacrifice freedom for security have embarked on this downward path. " -Ronald Reagan
Slashdot Mirror
You're right. "Thrust was observed on both test articles, even though one of the test articles was designed with the expectation that it would not produce thrust. Specifically, one test article contained internal physical modifications that were designed to produce thrust, while the other did not (with the latter being referred to as the "null" test article)." Also: "within a stainless steel vacuum chamber with the door closed but at ambient atmospheric pressure" I think maybe they made one of these: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
+1 for JavaScript. You can absolutely learn the fundamentals of programming from it. Learn about variables, control structures, functions, arrays and simple objects. Learn how to interact with the DOM. Once you're comfortable with those then move on to a more sophisticated language and learn the principles of OOP. Javascript's prototype based inheritance is not the place to learn OOP.
Why do you work for a company who's products you don't use? Is the app too expensive, or just not something that is suited to your life? Frankly if neither you nor your colleagues use a product your company created, why does the company think anyone will use it? If the product is good, but you just don't have a use for it, I don't see any ethical issues in promoting it. But if it's simply not a good product then I would probably not promote it, after all it's your personal reputation that is at stake. I'd also start looking for another job.
Start a campaign here: www.mycharitywater.org Or just make a flat donation: www.charitywater.org 100% of the money you donate goes to the field. They get their operations money from other sources. Lack of potable water is probably the most significant problem humanity faces. Solving this issue could bring millions of people out of poverty.
Unless of course you want to run it somewhere that doesn't support/allow java. Perish the thought. Otherwise totally agree.
Wow that was awesome, do you live in NJ, it's raining right now!
I have to say, that sounds like an excellent idea. I wouldn't be surprised if something like what you are suggesting is developed some day. There were supposed to be ground penetrating devices deployed on one of the earlier probes. Very similar in concept to what you are suggesting. I believe it was the polar lander? Sorry, to tired and lazy to google.
You are either lying, repeating a lie that was told to you, or the people at the Apple store were having fun with you. In any case nothing about what you wrote is true.
Because life would be nicer for all of us.
Amen Brother.
Excellent work and Congratulations! It is a beautiful movie, I would love to see more like this. I really think that this is the type of thing that can get people excited about space exploration. Will you be able to capture any more of these on subsequent flyby's? Will you be capturing the Moon at all. How about one for the Mercury approach? It would be remarkable to capture an entire voyage in this manner, from liftoff to arrival. I realize that the technical challenges might be quite daunting, and I'm sure it would have questionable scientific value, but it would certainly be an amazing thing to behold. The closest I would ever get to witnessing it first hand. Keep up the great work!
I'm willing to bet that the side effects of this will be that a super bug (like antibiotic resistant staph) will emerge that will wipe out large numbers of crocodiles.
Of course then they would have to hire someone to manage the sale and shipment of 1000 iBooks.
What kind of "value" are you looking for? If you want there to be a practical application then you will be disappointed. The major significance is that if verified, this would be the first finding of liquid on the surface of another body in the solar system.
If confirmed it would imply that liquids on the surface of planets and moons could be common in solar systems like ours.
You are correct in assuming that it is not water. It's hard to imagine a scenario where liquid water could exist on the surface of Titan.
I don't think that this lake will be useful to mankind for a very long time if ever, but the implications are important, thought provoking, and help people who study these things improve their theories and models. I find this valuable, others may be looking for something more tangible
Quick Google search returns a link to this guys web site where you can watch his cable access comercials and, low and behold, buy games
So I was wrong, they are ran it on a P4. I'm stunned.
I think that it will almost certainly be the case that Intel will simply be taking over production of the PPC 970 architecture from IBM
It's a great idea. I don't want it, and anyone that knew a thing or two would be better off with Linux, but most people will think this is great.
Would this work for video conferencing applications to make it apear that the users are both looking at the camera?
What you say really goes to the heart of the matter. Art can be defined as a sharing of the vision of an artist and the viewer. This is why a Kubrick film is more artful than say the evening news. Both communicate, one lays bare for you the mind and soul of it's creator. Art seeks to transcend the barrier that separates individuals by delivering emotion and truth via one or all of our senses ... Renaissance art was obsessed with beauty because this was to them an evocation of truth, but art does not have to be beautiful, modern art is obsessed with politics (detrimental in my mind) Every college student does that condom sculpture eventually. The intent is to share a vision, spread a message, be evocative. A computer cannot, to this day, do these things and therefore computer generated objects, or images cannot be art even if they are attractive.
I don't think that the differences that you hear are from it's spinning, I thought that too at first but then I realized that it would be a gradual increase and decrease, more like a sin wave than what you hear here.
Can't someone come up with a Snow Crash joke/reference. We're already 40 posts into this story and no one has mentioned it yet. What is slashdot coming to?
I have to say that I think you are wrong about the faster, cheaper, better philosophy being horribly wrong. It may not have been executed exceedingly well, but it did have some huge payoffs. If it weren't for faster cheaper better (smarter?) We probably would have only had one other Mars probe since the viking missions. Instead, we have a couple of orbiters and 3 mobile landers. The cost of these together has not even come close to the cost of one viking style probe. The philosophy behind faster, cheaper, smarter allowed for failures, the idea was you would spend 3 billion on a series of probes (instead of one), you can do them every two years (instead of every 10) and if you lose one you don't lose everything. I think that contrary to what you suggest the faster cheaper better philosophy has contributed a great deal to our understanding of Mars and not set us back 5 years. like this
And another thing
It seems that everyday we give a little bit more of our humanity away.