It was botched and it was the 5th failure. What is wrong with stating that? If it was an American launch there would be 2 dozen far worse taunting posts about it.
And, for what it is worth, I *do* know exactly how hard it is to launch something like that into space.
Only if you decide to study something painfully stupid. If you spend significant money acquired via a loan on a degree in LGBT studies or Russian literature, well, thats your mistake, not the college. It's entirely up to the individual to see if that is a good investment. Don't blame the costs, you know what it costs before you sign up.
I mean given that hobby R/C work pretty much the same way, just way smaller scale, who would have thought that you could override a remote signal.
It works *nothing* like an R/C model, aside from the fact that radio signals are somehow involved. R/C models are flown "by hand", i.e. the pilots manipulate the elevator/ailerons/throttle etc directly. The drones are almost entirely flown by the on-board autopilot, flight management computer, and inertial navigation. These are indeed connected via radio to the control center but rest assured, it is not being intercepted or overridden by external agencies.
This one had a malfunction, went into a fail-safe mode, ran out of fuel, and landed more-or-less intact. Of course they are claiming more than that.
An element is defined by the number of protons in the nucleus. Not by the number of protons in the nucleus that happen to stay together for a "long time (TBR)".
We could cheaply launch 10's of much faster probes with incrementally better sensors for the price of the voyager program (~$3B in today's dollars).
I am not sure why you say that. The costs of space technology haven't changed much at all relative to the rate of inflation, and there haven't been any important breakthroughs in launchers. The only thing consequentially different is computer capability, but a faster/more complex computer would just as likely be a liability as a bonus. Software design techniques, if anything, have gone rapidly backwards for this sort of application since the late 70s/early 80s.
I suppose that depends on the definition of "solve". Computationally, it's a numerical approximation. In most cases it can be approximated to any required accuracy for any practical purpose. But that's not what solved means in the context it was used.
His deep insight that true chaos devolves from ordered deterministic processes (e.g. cellular automatia) across all of nature is nothing short of astounding.
I am not sure why you say that, it's hardly a new idea, and he offers no particularly new insights. He (or rather his hordes of uncredited minions), have brute-force raised the bar on the degree of proof. And then he mentioned himself in the same breath as Einstein and Newton.
It's been known for decades that seemingly random processes can be generated by almost absurdly simple algorithms.
The Monster Raging egomania is absolutely no exaggeration. I think that aside, 'NKS" is not insane, merely an insane amount of effort to demonstrate (note, not *prove*) something that is ultimately trivial/tangential. It most certainly is not a "New Kind of Science", it's not science in any conventional definition.
This again? This train will *never* be built. And it's a stupid thing to build. Passenger rail hasn't made money since the mid 1800's, going faster won't make it any more viable.
Some majors might make no sense, or are useless, but the choice of taking that major should rest with the student and his or her adviser/parents(either or both).
That's all well and good, until someone has to support them. I am all for letting them clean toilets for the next 40 years. But, no, they are currently infesting, er, "occupying", Wall Street, Oakland, etc. demanding that someone give them money and a living. I suspect that is what the Chinese are trying to avoid.
It's not a "maker space", it's not a "fab lab". It's been referred to a "workshop" or something very similar for, as near as I can tell, 4-500 years. It has the same relevance to a library as a blast furnace.
library: late 14c., from Anglo-Fr. librarie, from O.Fr. librairie "collection of books," noun use of adj. librarius "concerning books," from L. librarium "chest for books," from liber (gen. libri) "book, paper, parchment," originally "the inner bark of trees," probably a derivative of PIE base *leub(h)- "to strip, to peel" (see leaf). The equivalent word in most Romance languages now means "bookseller's shop." O.E. had bochord, lit. "book hord."
What most nerds don't get about advertising and user experience is WHY. What can this do to me and why? "What do I get out of the freedom of Android (or Linux)?" It needs to be something that the user, the normal user, actually cares about. As a side note, I honestly can't think of any reason the freedom of Linux would provide to casual users, compared to Windows and OSX. That is probably the reason why Linux still isn't on desktop. It's also what Stallman constantly forgets to mention and just comes out as an asshole trying to force everyone to FOSS.
The iPhone ad shown in the article is actually perfect. It answers why, it shows what you can do and it doesn't go on and on about things users don't directly care about, like processor speed. Hell, I'm a geek and that ad made me want to buy iPhone (and on top of that iPad too!). The Android advertisement just left me thinking if it's an advertisement for some movie or wtf.
It's worse than just that - e.g. that Android fails to market the "why". The big problem is that if you actually try to market it that way, it comes up very, very short. Looking at it from the perspective of the potential buyer (not nerds), it's actually not very good. You get an iPhone, turn on a few things, and forget about it, just use the thing. It's not like that with Android, and they aren't even the same from vendor to vendor.
Until everyone involved gets that, android and essentially everything involved with open source (Linux and the variations) are going no further than they have - niche products and the source of nerdgasms.
You left out the part where Apple used it's market dominance to essentially force the record companies to offer the music at minimal prices compared to what would have been charged otherwise. And then forced them further to permit free-and-clear downloads which they had vowed to never allow.
I think the worst thing it that they are publishing psychology papers in Science. Aside from the most fundamental stimulus/response experiments (done decades ago) psychology depends on highly subjective observations and statistics that prove correlations but nothing about the underlying causations. It certainly doesn't lead to repeatable experiments.
A bigger mystery is how could tell the difference between a faked paper and a real one. They have about the same basis in fact.
The TSA and the whole DHS is going to get a well-deserved housecleaning around starting about Feb 2013.
On the other hand, a lot of these wonderful countries have decided to roll over for terrorism and for the destruction of their own cultures in the name of political correctness and multiculturalism. They don't call it Londinistan for nothing. Sort of like John Kerrys's theory that we should only attempt to limit terrorist attacks on Americans to "acceptable levels". That, and not his fake war hero act, lost him the election.
Wow. The *government* cannot provide anything for free. Anything that comes "from the government" comes from taxpayers, with a tremendous overhead (they call it the "skim" in Vegas) as it goes from my paycheck to the deadbeats. Anything else you may have heard is utter and complete nonsense.
Slashdot Mirror
Riiight. So I guess when the IMF comes calling on their Uncle Sugar for a handout to, say, bail out Europe, you'll be just fine with us saying no?
Hey, that happened today!
Brett
It was botched and it was the 5th failure. What is wrong with stating that? If it was an American launch there would be 2 dozen far worse taunting posts about it.
And, for what it is worth, I *do* know exactly how hard it is to launch something like that into space.
Seem to like our money well enough. If you *really* hate us so much then stop coming around with your hand out.
Only if you decide to study something painfully stupid. If you spend significant money acquired via a loan on a degree in LGBT studies or Russian literature, well, thats your mistake, not the college. It's entirely up to the individual to see if that is a good investment. Don't blame the costs, you know what it costs before you sign up.
Ooh, I wish we could mod people +6/mrsmalaprop
Be sure to read the part where jury nullification is illegal.
It works *nothing* like an R/C model, aside from the fact that radio signals are somehow involved. R/C models are flown "by hand", i.e. the pilots manipulate the elevator/ailerons/throttle etc directly. The drones are almost entirely flown by the on-board autopilot, flight management computer, and inertial navigation. These are indeed connected via radio to the control center but rest assured, it is not being intercepted or overridden by external agencies.
This one had a malfunction, went into a fail-safe mode, ran out of fuel, and landed more-or-less intact. Of course they are claiming more than that.
Brett
Yes, we are heading for that sort of world. It's a damn disgrace.
"If I don't survive this, tell my wife hello".
An element is defined by the number of protons in the nucleus. Not by the number of protons in the nucleus that happen to stay together for a "long time (TBR)".
Those same advantages have tended to reduce reliability and robustness, particularly robustness to radiation damage.
I am not sure why you say that. The costs of space technology haven't changed much at all relative to the rate of inflation, and there haven't been any important breakthroughs in launchers. The only thing consequentially different is computer capability, but a faster/more complex computer would just as likely be a liability as a bonus. Software design techniques, if anything, have gone rapidly backwards for this sort of application since the late 70s/early 80s.
I suppose that depends on the definition of "solve". Computationally, it's a numerical approximation. In most cases it can be approximated to any required accuracy for any practical purpose. But that's not what solved means in the context it was used.
Brett
I am not sure why you say that, it's hardly a new idea, and he offers no particularly new insights. He (or rather his hordes of uncredited minions), have brute-force raised the bar on the degree of proof. And then he mentioned himself in the same breath as Einstein and Newton.
It's been known for decades that seemingly random processes can be generated by almost absurdly simple algorithms.
The Monster Raging egomania is absolutely no exaggeration. I think that aside, 'NKS" is not insane, merely an insane amount of effort to demonstrate (note, not *prove*) something that is ultimately trivial/tangential. It most certainly is not a "New Kind of Science", it's not science in any conventional definition.
That review is great but the title is overblown.
Brett
This again? This train will *never* be built. And it's a stupid thing to build. Passenger rail hasn't made money since the mid 1800's, going faster won't make it any more viable.
That's all well and good, until someone has to support them. I am all for letting them clean toilets for the next 40 years. But, no, they are currently infesting, er, "occupying", Wall Street, Oakland, etc. demanding that someone give them money and a living. I suspect that is what the Chinese are trying to avoid.
Brett
It's not a "maker space", it's not a "fab lab". It's been referred to a "workshop" or something very similar for, as near as I can tell, 4-500 years. It has the same relevance to a library as a blast furnace.
library:
late 14c., from Anglo-Fr. librarie, from O.Fr. librairie "collection of books," noun use of adj. librarius "concerning books," from L. librarium "chest for books," from liber (gen. libri) "book, paper, parchment," originally "the inner bark of trees," probably a derivative of PIE base *leub(h)- "to strip, to peel" (see leaf). The equivalent word in most Romance languages now means "bookseller's shop." O.E. had bochord, lit. "book hord."
Why would you want someone to start from scratch, when they are approaching the theoretical maximum performance already?
It's worse than just that - e.g. that Android fails to market the "why". The big problem is that if you actually try to market it that way, it comes up very, very short. Looking at it from the perspective of the potential buyer (not nerds), it's actually not very good. You get an iPhone, turn on a few things, and forget about it, just use the thing. It's not like that with Android, and they aren't even the same from vendor to vendor.
Until everyone involved gets that, android and essentially everything involved with open source (Linux and the variations) are going no further than they have - niche products and the source of nerdgasms.
You left out the part where Apple used it's market dominance to essentially force the record companies to offer the music at minimal prices compared to what would have been charged otherwise. And then forced them further to permit free-and-clear downloads which they had vowed to never allow.
Brett
I think the worst thing it that they are publishing psychology papers in Science. Aside from the most fundamental stimulus/response experiments (done decades ago) psychology depends on highly subjective observations and statistics that prove correlations but nothing about the underlying causations. It certainly doesn't lead to repeatable experiments.
A bigger mystery is how could tell the difference between a faked paper and a real one. They have about the same basis in fact.
Brett
The TSA and the whole DHS is going to get a well-deserved housecleaning around starting about Feb 2013.
On the other hand, a lot of these wonderful countries have decided to roll over for terrorism and for the destruction of their own cultures in the name of political correctness and multiculturalism. They don't call it Londinistan for nothing. Sort of like John Kerrys's theory that we should only attempt to limit terrorist attacks on Americans to "acceptable levels". That, and not his fake war hero act, lost him the election.
Wow. The *government* cannot provide anything for free. Anything that comes "from the government" comes from taxpayers, with a tremendous overhead (they call it the "skim" in Vegas) as it goes from my paycheck to the deadbeats. Anything else you may have heard is utter and complete nonsense.
Brett
Don't forget socialized medicine, Medicare on steriods