Are secondary customers going to always get the shaft with NASA as a primary customer?
Yes. That's what happens with 'secondary' customers. They don't pay much at all. They get a sort-of free ride with the proviso that the primary customer is well, primary. I'm sure that has been thought through rather carefully by SpaceX, Orbcomm and NASA. Dozens of meetings. Thousands of emails. It's pretty normal these days. How to get into orbit on the cheap. You don't get the window seat and you get bumped often.
It has taken folks decades to get the technology to sequence such DNA. It's very degraded. IIRC, they rely on multiple overlaps of small fragments and the technology has been pushing that fragment size down over the years. I'm sure you could look it up. To tired at the moment.
A country can be very diverse and successful. Consider Canada and Singapore.
A country can be racially pure and successful. Consider Denmark and Switzerland (yes I realize they have four languages but they haven't had any immigration for a long time).
Success is cyclic. Today's world beating country is tomorrow's basket case. The Soviet Union was very diverse. It was one of the world's two super powers. Then it was a basket case. Now a more racially pure Russia climbing out of its hole. Similarly Japan. It is very racially pure. It was one of the strongest economies in the world. Now it appears to be on its way down.
For every example one way, there is an example the other way. The study is bunk.
I think this is one of the more cogent responses of the issue. If the thesis of the study is that 'genetic diversity influences economic viability' then you are trying to correlate at least two variables that have had widely disparate values over time and fluctuate on different time scales (hundreds, if not thousands of years for genetics, years for economies). If you did this study 30 years ago when the genetics were probably the same and the economic indicators were different, what kind of result are you going to get.
Actually, I would posit that you could do that with the data set. Just take the genetics data and correlate it with WWI economics. Rinse and repeat.
This and very much this. It's hard to imagine a marriage between genetics, a real science and economics - something that tails astrology and is just one jump ahead of homeopathy as a 'science'.
You will never get anything useful out of it. Economists should not be allowed to pretend to read hard science papers. It will just give them airs.
Really? What would cause this. This means it can't be used in places like Leadville, CO for example. Is this some sleazy warranty trick? Granted, this is the same for the 4th generation but I don't understand why any media player would be limited to 10,000 feet.
Magic Pixie dust doesn't work well at low atmospheric pressures. Want proof? How many iPhones / iPods are on Mars?
Look at the Sony consumer space for my parable - from the 70's to the mid 90's. At some point they were 'the' consumer brand. Today. not so much. Just a couple of major missteps and it can happen. Certainly not overnight but over 5 -10 years - yep.
Yep. In my small, rural town, everybody gets to dump 200 pounds of stuff every month for free. Further, once a year, you can dump all you can haul over in a one week time frame. We have free electronic junk recycling. We haul off cars for free (boats you have to pay a bit extra for unless they're aluminum).
People still go to the end of the road to dump off stuff that you can legally drop off for free. And they leave envelopes / pay stubs and all manner of incriminating evidence.
The amount of stupid in the water is truly amazing.
Nah, you're not thinking. This is Slashdot - the home of the BSD toaster.
So, you get the aforementioned hunter cam, then you open the case, find the signal to that fires the camera, rig a opsoisolated switch to another relay circuit that fires off a couple of M80's and a small amount of thermite. Take the pics, wait a few seconds, fire off the M80's and the thermite. For extra fun, take a few more pics.
Bonus points for rigging explosions down the road on a tripwire or such so that you continue to 'fire' on the miscreants as the run screaming for their lives.
Not really. Apple's portfolio begins with an little 'i'. Microsoft, as tgd points out, has a much broader base.
Apple sells to consumers. Consumers have this herd like behavior that allows them to rapidly change directions quickly. In fact, Apple is much more vulnerable than Sony because, like Microsoft, Sony has huge monetary stakes in things you've likely not even heard of (CMOS imager fabs, medical stuff - Sony is huge).
Apple is just a couple of PC clones and a phone and a tablet. Hey, they're doing fantastic now - personally, I Iike (some of) their products. But they are very vertical. And one of these days they might lose their balance.
Interestingly, if control was a problem, then modern electronics / servos and similar technology could probably mitigate those issues successfully. I think a personal flying saucer, even if it didn't hit Mach 3, would be pretty damned cool.
Well you could call your senator and tell them to take the class. You could mention how voters in the technical community would be more likely to vote for them. Or at the very least, it might help them gain respect from that voting block.
Senators, by and large, need an 'introduction to the introduction' class and, unfortunately Ted 'the Tubes' Stevens isn't with us anymore to help guide the curriculum. Judging from what comes out of Congress the days a blank chalkboard is about all we could expect most of them to be able to handle on their own.
Slashdot Mirror
Are secondary customers going to always get the shaft with NASA as a primary customer?
Yes. That's what happens with 'secondary' customers. They don't pay much at all. They get a sort-of free ride with the proviso that the primary customer is well, primary. I'm sure that has been thought through rather carefully by SpaceX, Orbcomm and NASA. Dozens of meetings. Thousands of emails. It's pretty normal these days. How to get into orbit on the cheap. You don't get the window seat and you get bumped often.
OK. I just showed my computer a picture of a Komodo Dragon. It just is sitting there, doing nothing.
Now what am I supposed to do?
It has taken folks decades to get the technology to sequence such DNA. It's very degraded. IIRC, they rely on multiple overlaps of small fragments and the technology has been pushing that fragment size down over the years. I'm sure you could look it up. To tired at the moment.
All you need is C-span.
Although 'alive' is pushing it a bit.
A country can be very diverse and successful. Consider Canada and Singapore.
A country can be racially pure and successful. Consider Denmark and Switzerland (yes I realize they have four languages but they haven't had any immigration for a long time).
Success is cyclic. Today's world beating country is tomorrow's basket case. The Soviet Union was very diverse. It was one of the world's two super powers. Then it was a basket case. Now a more racially pure Russia climbing out of its hole. Similarly Japan. It is very racially pure. It was one of the strongest economies in the world. Now it appears to be on its way down.
For every example one way, there is an example the other way. The study is bunk.
I think this is one of the more cogent responses of the issue. If the thesis of the study is that 'genetic diversity influences economic viability' then you are trying to correlate at least two variables that have had widely disparate values over time and fluctuate on different time scales (hundreds, if not thousands of years for genetics, years for economies). If you did this study 30 years ago when the genetics were probably the same and the economic indicators were different, what kind of result are you going to get.
Actually, I would posit that you could do that with the data set. Just take the genetics data and correlate it with WWI economics. Rinse and repeat.
This and very much this. It's hard to imagine a marriage between genetics, a real science and economics - something that tails astrology and is just one jump ahead of homeopathy as a 'science'.
You will never get anything useful out of it. Economists should not be allowed to pretend to read hard science papers. It will just give them airs.
From the specs on Apples page:
Maximum operating altitude: 10,000 feet (3000 m)
Really? What would cause this. This means it can't be used in places like Leadville, CO for example. Is this some sleazy warranty trick? Granted, this is the same for the 4th generation but I don't understand why any media player would be limited to 10,000 feet.
Magic Pixie dust doesn't work well at low atmospheric pressures. Want proof? How many iPhones / iPods are on Mars?
Look at the Sony consumer space for my parable - from the 70's to the mid 90's. At some point they were 'the' consumer brand. Today. not so much. Just a couple of major missteps and it can happen. Certainly not overnight but over 5 -10 years - yep.
You're thinking of caltrops. Always good to have a supply.
Yep. In my small, rural town, everybody gets to dump 200 pounds of stuff every month for free. Further, once a year, you can dump all you can haul over in a one week time frame. We have free electronic junk recycling. We haul off cars for free (boats you have to pay a bit extra for unless they're aluminum).
People still go to the end of the road to dump off stuff that you can legally drop off for free. And they leave envelopes / pay stubs and all manner of incriminating evidence.
The amount of stupid in the water is truly amazing.
Nah, you're not thinking. This is Slashdot - the home of the BSD toaster.
So, you get the aforementioned hunter cam, then you open the case, find the signal to that fires the camera, rig a opsoisolated switch to another relay circuit that fires off a couple of M80's and a small amount of thermite. Take the pics, wait a few seconds, fire off the M80's and the thermite. For extra fun, take a few more pics.
Bonus points for rigging explosions down the road on a tripwire or such so that you continue to 'fire' on the miscreants as the run screaming for their lives.
Use some imagination here, folks.
Not really. Apple's portfolio begins with an little 'i'. Microsoft, as tgd points out, has a much broader base.
Apple sells to consumers. Consumers have this herd like behavior that allows them to rapidly change directions quickly. In fact, Apple is much more vulnerable than Sony because, like Microsoft, Sony has huge monetary stakes in things you've likely not even heard of (CMOS imager fabs, medical stuff - Sony is huge).
Apple is just a couple of PC clones and a phone and a tablet. Hey, they're doing fantastic now - personally, I Iike (some of) their products. But they are very vertical. And one of these days they might lose their balance.
I dunno. Moving Apple in another direction resonates well with me.
No you're being pedantic. I'm being picayune.
Cthulhu / Dagon - why vote for the lesser evil?
Here, start at the beginning. Then go bleach your brain to get rid of the images.
Well, if that was the case, Apple should have rigged it so it can only charge on 400 Hz AC, like you seen in aircraft. Now that would be exclusive.
It then went to the Piggly Wiggly and some strange creature came out of the store carrying a six pack.
Strange creatures, indeed.
You're forgetting the most important one, Forbidden Planet (and Anne Francis, pooh on Natalie Portman....)
Interestingly, if control was a problem, then modern electronics / servos and similar technology could probably mitigate those issues successfully. I think a personal flying saucer, even if it didn't hit Mach 3, would be pretty damned cool.
The Jetsons!
"I saw the best lights of my generation ... "
Americans can always be counted on to do the right thing.
After they've exhausted all other possibilities.
- W. Churchill
Well you could call your senator and tell them to take the class. You could mention how voters in the technical community would be more likely to vote for them. Or at the very least, it might help them gain respect from that voting block.
Senators, by and large, need an 'introduction to the introduction' class and, unfortunately Ted 'the Tubes' Stevens isn't with us anymore to help guide the curriculum. Judging from what comes out of Congress the days a blank chalkboard is about all we could expect most of them to be able to handle on their own.
I just stay at home and read Slashdot.
I'm better than both of you!
If two individuals give fertile descendency, aren't they of the same species?
Welcome to the Species Problem.
tl;dr - It's complicated.