...they are very productive. A half hour is all it takes to get 15 people all on the same page, form a plan, and act. Early morning for hot topics and action plans, and a 15 minute standup in the afternoon to get a feel for how it's all coming together. Of course, if we did that all the time, we'd burn out.
The article says the J2-X uses liquid oxygen and liquid hydrogen as fuel. Does that imply the byproduct of the J2-X is water vapor? The old Apollo rockets used kerosene. I know NASA used a lot of water to control heat and vibration for shuttle launches and other rocket tests (which is likely what you see in the video)... but is that also the exhaust gas here?
All fax machines are required to implement delivery confirmation and time stamps, and log a certain number of incoming and outgoing faxes. There is a rigid standard behind the faxing specs, and fax records can be (and have been) used in a court of law. It's hard to find another *cheap* and *widely adopted* digital sending standard that has the same legal robustness, with a proven track record. That alone is why fax technology will be slow to die.
Rush Limbaugh put his apartment on New York up for sale after a tax increase, specifically for that reason. I'm sure he made it widely known he was doing so, and probably is a major root cause of this misconception.
When discussing the increase of a subset in any given set, stating a percentage of increase that subset is a perfectly valid thing to do.
That holds true when discussing the increase of greenhouse gasses because the volume of the atmosphere as a whole doesn't matter considering that the vast majority of the gasses in the atmosphere are not greenhouse gasses. Earth's atmosphere is about 78% Nitrogen, 21% Oxygen, neither of which are greenhouse gasses. That leaves us with 1% "other". A vast majority of that "other" is Argon (90%??), also not a greenhouse gas.
Only 1% of 1% of Earth's atmosphere is composed of greenhouse gasses, so saying that the largest value in that significant subset increased by 37% is being quite accurate and is a perfectly reasonable thing to do. If you want to put the Fox News spin on that percentage by calling it "alarmist", go right ahead, but understand that you are contributing very little to what should be an informed conversation.
...because we've increased the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere over 37% in the last 100 years. That's a substantial amount, so if it has less of an impact, we're all better off. That said, this should not be used as an excused to maintain the unmaintainable status quo.
I just read today that the US Military spends $20 billion per year on expenses related to *air conditioning* in Iraq. That's more than NASA's entire budget. I hear things like that, and it really puts the the "way too much money for too little return" argument in to perspective. We need to learn a lot more about space and space travel before we can venture forth, so any kind of money spent on studying those complicated (and expensive issues) is worth it.
and TMI didn't actually release any harmful materials.
Chernobyl exploded and blew threw it's containment vessel, leaving the reacting nuclear fuel exposed to the outside world, burning everything around it and releasing all the smoke and debris in to the open air. Chernobyl was much worse than Fukushima (although things seem to keep getting worse there day by day).
Since you're one of the authors, I thought I'd chime in and share my experience. I'm partially color blind, and if you put certain reds, greens and/or grays next to each other I have a real hard time distinguishing what's what. I'm not sure how much that affected what I perceived when I watched these.
When I watched the first video with the vividly colored dots, and they started moving, I thought "Huh, I don't get it. I see the colors change. What's the big deal?" My wife, who was watching at the same time, could see very few color changes when the dots started moving. I thought she was just joking, until we watched the grayscale dots. Wow... I could not detect a single dot changing shade unless I cheated and started following them with my eyes. She did much better on that one than I. The shapes one was quite interesting for me. The circles morphed smoothly in to plus signs before they started moving. When moving, they seemed to instantly change to little plus signs (I could not perceive any kind of 'morphing' effect, just instantaneous change).
I'd be curious to know if you have considered how color blindness of varying degrees may affect how these videos are perceived by some.
All the usuals + Meditation
on
Anxiety and IT?
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
I've gotten a lot more disciplined in my exercise schedule, and have always eaten good foods, but I've started going to weekly mediation and have been going for about a year now. The exercise just helps me feel good (hooked on endorphins!), but meditation helps bring awareness and focus and has given me the ability to slow down and pause during the day, let my thoughts all line up, and then focus on one at a time. Having the ability to focus on one thing at a time is nice.
The right to interstate travel without government interference has been upheld by the courts: flying is a right, not a privilege.
Unfortunately, I bet a lawsuit with this argument wouldn't hold up in court. Pick any destination within the US. In all likelihood you can get to that same destination by car or other transportation that wouldn't require you to pass through an airport terminal. Air travel is just more "convenient" and I'm sure the counter argument would be framed that way.
Slashdot Mirror
Incorrect, as long as you follow the rules. Rules For Use
You can read all the rules about copying money here: Rules For Use
We get signal!
...they are very productive. A half hour is all it takes to get 15 people all on the same page, form a plan, and act. Early morning for hot topics and action plans, and a 15 minute standup in the afternoon to get a feel for how it's all coming together. Of course, if we did that all the time, we'd burn out.
// LOL!
// He could just comment it out.
/* amiright? */
The article says the J2-X uses liquid oxygen and liquid hydrogen as fuel. Does that imply the byproduct of the J2-X is water vapor? The old Apollo rockets used kerosene. I know NASA used a lot of water to control heat and vibration for shuttle launches and other rocket tests (which is likely what you see in the video)... but is that also the exhaust gas here?
"find the roots of a quadratic equation." Crap, I never could remember that whole "completing the square" thing. I'm doomed.
NPR has a little blurb on this...
*sigh* no mod points. +1 Informative! Hip hip hooray!
All fax machines are required to implement delivery confirmation and time stamps, and log a certain number of incoming and outgoing faxes. There is a rigid standard behind the faxing specs, and fax records can be (and have been) used in a court of law. It's hard to find another *cheap* and *widely adopted* digital sending standard that has the same legal robustness, with a proven track record. That alone is why fax technology will be slow to die.
Rush Limbaugh put his apartment on New York up for sale after a tax increase, specifically for that reason. I'm sure he made it widely known he was doing so, and probably is a major root cause of this misconception.
When discussing the increase of a subset in any given set, stating a percentage of increase that subset is a perfectly valid thing to do.
That holds true when discussing the increase of greenhouse gasses because the volume of the atmosphere as a whole doesn't matter considering that the vast majority of the gasses in the atmosphere are not greenhouse gasses. Earth's atmosphere is about 78% Nitrogen, 21% Oxygen, neither of which are greenhouse gasses. That leaves us with 1% "other". A vast majority of that "other" is Argon (90%??), also not a greenhouse gas.
Only 1% of 1% of Earth's atmosphere is composed of greenhouse gasses, so saying that the largest value in that significant subset increased by 37% is being quite accurate and is a perfectly reasonable thing to do. If you want to put the Fox News spin on that percentage by calling it "alarmist", go right ahead, but understand that you are contributing very little to what should be an informed conversation.
...because we've increased the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere over 37% in the last 100 years. That's a substantial amount, so if it has less of an impact, we're all better off. That said, this should not be used as an excused to maintain the unmaintainable status quo.
It's pronounced "!=". Sheesh ;-)
I just read today that the US Military spends $20 billion per year on expenses related to *air conditioning* in Iraq. That's more than NASA's entire budget. I hear things like that, and it really puts the the "way too much money for too little return" argument in to perspective. We need to learn a lot more about space and space travel before we can venture forth, so any kind of money spent on studying those complicated (and expensive issues) is worth it.
5, because they only produce peak output for about 15 minutes.
I guess that makes the US and China "frienemies".
I thought you were going to say "Profit". Haha.
...would be hostile.
and TMI didn't actually release any harmful materials.
Chernobyl exploded and blew threw it's containment vessel, leaving the reacting nuclear fuel exposed to the outside world, burning everything around it and releasing all the smoke and debris in to the open air. Chernobyl was much worse than Fukushima (although things seem to keep getting worse there day by day).
It can never be a race to the top if the goal is infinite productivity at zero cost.
Since you're one of the authors, I thought I'd chime in and share my experience. I'm partially color blind, and if you put certain reds, greens and/or grays next to each other I have a real hard time distinguishing what's what. I'm not sure how much that affected what I perceived when I watched these.
When I watched the first video with the vividly colored dots, and they started moving, I thought "Huh, I don't get it. I see the colors change. What's the big deal?" My wife, who was watching at the same time, could see very few color changes when the dots started moving. I thought she was just joking, until we watched the grayscale dots. Wow... I could not detect a single dot changing shade unless I cheated and started following them with my eyes. She did much better on that one than I. The shapes one was quite interesting for me. The circles morphed smoothly in to plus signs before they started moving. When moving, they seemed to instantly change to little plus signs (I could not perceive any kind of 'morphing' effect, just instantaneous change).
I'd be curious to know if you have considered how color blindness of varying degrees may affect how these videos are perceived by some.
I've gotten a lot more disciplined in my exercise schedule, and have always eaten good foods, but I've started going to weekly mediation and have been going for about a year now. The exercise just helps me feel good (hooked on endorphins!), but meditation helps bring awareness and focus and has given me the ability to slow down and pause during the day, let my thoughts all line up, and then focus on one at a time. Having the ability to focus on one thing at a time is nice.
Unfortunately, I bet a lawsuit with this argument wouldn't hold up in court. Pick any destination within the US. In all likelihood you can get to that same destination by car or other transportation that wouldn't require you to pass through an airport terminal. Air travel is just more "convenient" and I'm sure the counter argument would be framed that way.