I'm all for science/technology/astronomy but...
on
Back to Moon in 2015?
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Why the moon? Well, I suppose it's basically in our backyard, and for interstellar toddlers, it's a pretty good goal to start. Today the moon, tomorrow the universe, eh?
But still, is there anything on the moon that we can use/do that would be cool, other than just developing the technology used to get there?
The hilarious thing is these pants don't have the specific definition of "nanotechnology" in them at all. They are deliberately skewing the use of the word from the specific common-use meaning of "very small machines" to a very general case "very small manmade things". ALL it is is very small fibers of teflon, which is not a machine at all, just some molecules.
So, this is retarded every way you look at it. The protesters are protesting something that isn't even nanotechnology as it is commonly referred to in the first place!
A picocell can use a different frequency than the ones the phones use, a frequency that is less likely to mess with astronomers / etc. The cellphones will see a "tower" very close by, and use minimal broadcast strength.
The thing is, it's "software developers" not just programmers. I think developers implies the whole scheme of designers, from the first ideas to the programming itself.
You are 100% missing the point of this exercise. It's more art than technology. It isn't about speed, it's about fun, and beauty, and designing something yourself, without the need for the latest-and-greatest. It's much easier to buy a fish at the store than catch one yourself, but I don't see fishermen stopping that any time soon.
Really? Weird. I use Firefox (in Linux) to open sometimes hundreds of tabs, on a machine with 256 MB of memory and a 5400 rpm 4 gig HD, and it works fine (viewing all the recent pictures on collegehumor). I also have had it open for weeks at a time without a problem. Same thing with Thunderbird, which I use at work (on Windows), it stays open as long as Windows stays up (which is usually a week or so). And I always have about 30 things running on my machine at work all the time.
am I kidding? Have you seen it? It's awful, straight out of 1991, it would fit just perfect next to a couple of animated gifs of "under construction" and "send me e-mail" that folds up into an envelope and flies away. I mean, I don't usually criticize people contributing free stuff, but damn. I could've peed something in the snow better than that.
You're still not going to get infinite torque with that equation, because the power at 0 RPM is 0 (power is torque times angular velocity). Giving you a meaningless 0/0 equation. The equation you are using for the situation is flawed.
Are you retarded? They do not have infinite torque at 0 velocity (you mean RPM). They have _maximum_ torque there. If they had infinite torque, that would mean there was no way you could ever stop an electric motor.
In response - leaving the CAT on also has a confirmed and unvarying negative impact on the environment and society, but it is much less well known: with a CAT on the car, there are much higher pumping losses within the engine, so you end up getting a good bit less miles per gallon. While the exhaust that comes out per mile is on average cleaner (the CAT does indeed do it's job), I am depleting the world's stock of oil at a quicker pace. So, I'm not just pissing in the drinking water or not, I have a choice of either pissing in the drinking water or pissing in the bathing water; it's just that the government mandates that everybody piss in the bathing water and tells us it's better, because the environmental hippies either don't know any better or have a one-sided agenda and don't reveal enough information. The difference in miles per gallon was significant as well, average of ~22 mpg with the cat, and average of ~28 mpg without (averaged over a one year period of use with each; yes I did remove my cat). I see this as a fairly similar argument to anonymity or not; I can either chose to support anonymity, and the possibility that people will use it for evil (piss in the drinking water), or I can ban anonymity in the name of security (piss in the wash water).
Jesus H. Christ, you criticize me with those spelling skills, and "Anonymous Coward"? The sentence does indeed begin with "previously", followed by "began to strike back", which meant that in the past they were starting to strike back, trying to get their way, but it appears that now they aren't trying to get their way; so which is it? The summary completely neglects any description of if they tried and failed, or tried and gave up. If you say something, even in a summary, you should have some quick info about why, or how, so that people aren't confused.
Are they "unlikely to push" or "striking back"? The summary is confusing.
Why TF is this flamebait? This is an honest question. The summary has two distinctly contradictory statements about the MPAA. One statement says that they are unlikely to push, while the other says they are striking back (indicating that they are pushing for it) I was just asking for clarification, you douchebags.
Then I'm severely addicted to showering and brushing my teeth, because my brain isn't homeostatic at all without doing either very first thing in the morning.
I'll bet a lot of businesspeople are also addicted to using ballpoint pens, sticky notes, and pads of paper, and won't go more than a few days without any of those.
Well technically, by removing my catalytic converter, I've just transfered the damage from the world's oil supplies (I burn less fuel) to the environment (the fuel I do burn comes out dirtier); so that wasn't a perfect analogy to make, but you must understand what I mean. Just because one person wants to be able to communicate anonymously doesn't give them the right to. It's society that makes the rules (sometimes the government does a bad job at it, but in a perfect world, the government would reflect society).
You don't say! I have a horrible breakfast, lunch, and dinner addiction. I also check my e-mail approximately 480 times a day (once a minute every minute).
That's why I said I know there's a difference between communication and filesharing, I was just talking about the general principle of anonymity, not anonymous file sharing per-se (that's why I specifically pointed out that point, to avoid you having to point it out again).
Slashdot Mirror
Why the moon? Well, I suppose it's basically in our backyard, and for interstellar toddlers, it's a pretty good goal to start. Today the moon, tomorrow the universe, eh?
But still, is there anything on the moon that we can use/do that would be cool, other than just developing the technology used to get there?
-Jesse
The hilarious thing is these pants don't have the specific definition of "nanotechnology" in them at all. They are deliberately skewing the use of the word from the specific common-use meaning of "very small machines" to a very general case "very small manmade things". ALL it is is very small fibers of teflon, which is not a machine at all, just some molecules.
So, this is retarded every way you look at it. The protesters are protesting something that isn't even nanotechnology as it is commonly referred to in the first place!
-Jesse
A picocell can use a different frequency than the ones the phones use, a frequency that is less likely to mess with astronomers / etc. The cellphones will see a "tower" very close by, and use minimal broadcast strength.
-Jesse
Also good point. That's a very funny thing to think about by the way, I think it'd make a great TDC show: Build a house in 30 days with no plans.
-Jesse
The thing is, it's "software developers" not just programmers. I think developers implies the whole scheme of designers, from the first ideas to the programming itself.
-Jesse
All you whippersnappers, I do my PHP in assembly, and I like it!
-Jesse, not really old, but do like/use assembly daily.
Couldn't the trash-80's set themselves on fire? :)
-Jesse, still uses his C-64 on occasion.
Seriously, honest question. What's not to get about a language? It's just another language with different options, styles, formats, and uses...
-Jesse
You are 100% missing the point of this exercise. It's more art than technology. It isn't about speed, it's about fun, and beauty, and designing something yourself, without the need for the latest-and-greatest. It's much easier to buy a fish at the store than catch one yourself, but I don't see fishermen stopping that any time soon.
-Jesse
Jeff Albertson
-Jesse
Really? Weird. I use Firefox (in Linux) to open sometimes hundreds of tabs, on a machine with 256 MB of memory and a 5400 rpm 4 gig HD, and it works fine (viewing all the recent pictures on collegehumor). I also have had it open for weeks at a time without a problem. Same thing with Thunderbird, which I use at work (on Windows), it stays open as long as Windows stays up (which is usually a week or so). And I always have about 30 things running on my machine at work all the time.
-Jesse
am I kidding? Have you seen it? It's awful, straight out of 1991, it would fit just perfect next to a couple of animated gifs of "under construction" and "send me e-mail" that folds up into an envelope and flies away. I mean, I don't usually criticize people contributing free stuff, but damn. I could've peed something in the snow better than that.
-Jesse
Worst... Logo... Ever.
-Jeff Albertson
You're still not going to get infinite torque with that equation, because the power at 0 RPM is 0 (power is torque times angular velocity). Giving you a meaningless 0/0 equation. The equation you are using for the situation is flawed.
-Jesse
Are you retarded? They do not have infinite torque at 0 velocity (you mean RPM). They have _maximum_ torque there. If they had infinite torque, that would mean there was no way you could ever stop an electric motor.
-Jesse
In response - leaving the CAT on also has a confirmed and unvarying negative impact on the environment and society, but it is much less well known: with a CAT on the car, there are much higher pumping losses within the engine, so you end up getting a good bit less miles per gallon. While the exhaust that comes out per mile is on average cleaner (the CAT does indeed do it's job), I am depleting the world's stock of oil at a quicker pace. So, I'm not just pissing in the drinking water or not, I have a choice of either pissing in the drinking water or pissing in the bathing water; it's just that the government mandates that everybody piss in the bathing water and tells us it's better, because the environmental hippies either don't know any better or have a one-sided agenda and don't reveal enough information. The difference in miles per gallon was significant as well, average of ~22 mpg with the cat, and average of ~28 mpg without (averaged over a one year period of use with each; yes I did remove my cat). I see this as a fairly similar argument to anonymity or not; I can either chose to support anonymity, and the possibility that people will use it for evil (piss in the drinking water), or I can ban anonymity in the name of security (piss in the wash water).
-Jesse
Seriously though. Now how will I know who's computer it is I'm double-clicking on?
No really seriously though. Now I can't say "My Computer!" in a big retarded voice whenever I have to double-click on it.
Really though, this is some big news, a drastic change like this to the windows UI hasn't happened since 3.1.
-Jesse
Jesus H. Christ, you criticize me with those spelling skills, and "Anonymous Coward"? The sentence does indeed begin with "previously", followed by "began to strike back", which meant that in the past they were starting to strike back, trying to get their way, but it appears that now they aren't trying to get their way; so which is it? The summary completely neglects any description of if they tried and failed, or tried and gave up. If you say something, even in a summary, you should have some quick info about why, or how, so that people aren't confused.
-Jesse
Are they "unlikely to push" or "striking back"? The summary is confusing.
Why TF is this flamebait? This is an honest question. The summary has two distinctly contradictory statements about the MPAA. One statement says that they are unlikely to push, while the other says they are striking back (indicating that they are pushing for it) I was just asking for clarification, you douchebags.
-Jesse
Are they "unlikely to push" or "striking back"? The summary is confusing.
-Jesse
Then I'm severely addicted to showering and brushing my teeth, because my brain isn't homeostatic at all without doing either very first thing in the morning.
-Jesse
I'll bet a lot of businesspeople are also addicted to using ballpoint pens, sticky notes, and pads of paper, and won't go more than a few days without any of those.
-Jesse
Well technically, by removing my catalytic converter, I've just transfered the damage from the world's oil supplies (I burn less fuel) to the environment (the fuel I do burn comes out dirtier); so that wasn't a perfect analogy to make, but you must understand what I mean. Just because one person wants to be able to communicate anonymously doesn't give them the right to. It's society that makes the rules (sometimes the government does a bad job at it, but in a perfect world, the government would reflect society).
-Jesse
You don't say! I have a horrible breakfast, lunch, and dinner addiction. I also check my e-mail approximately 480 times a day (once a minute every minute).
-Jesse
That's why I said I know there's a difference between communication and filesharing, I was just talking about the general principle of anonymity, not anonymous file sharing per-se (that's why I specifically pointed out that point, to avoid you having to point it out again).