Elon Musk: Depends on how common. If we can make reusability work well, I think we can get the cost per person to orbit down to a few million dollars within eight to ten years. If reusability works well and demand is strong, so that we can distribute overhead over a large number of launches, it could one day get to under $1M.
This strikes me as one of those quotes that people are going to laugh at 30 years from now, like the oft-repeated quotes on how someday computers will be 'only a few tons' and 'take up only one room'. At least, I hope so.
The submitter is quite right. I have an iPhone, and the biggest challenge with doing as the camera suggests (a coworker of mine had the same idea) is that it uses a fixed-focus lens, set to 'infinity', which means that it cannot focus on near objects - so the barcode has to be far enough that it's within the focal range, but big enough that it can be seen from there.
The phrase is 'pass the bar', and I would find it likely that the various other bar associations would ban him from doing so as a result of his reputation, if nothing else. Why would they want a disgraced lawyer?
to heck with zone files, set up something like PowerDNS and set it up with a database backup. Do one update query and push out to the slaves. PDNS is also quite snappy, and configuration is far less arcane compared to Bind - in five minutes I had an authoritative, non-recursing DNS server which was not vulnerable to the Kaminsky vulnerability (even if it did recurse). It does things same, logs sanely, and doesn't make me feel like a clueless newbie like Bind does (even after ten years of adminning DNS servers).
Then give them the simple explanation - DRM is the thing that means you can't skip previews and intros on DVDs you've purchased, no matter how many times you've watched them.
That's an analogy that's likely to get through to the average (DVD-watching) consumer.
More important, how's the latency? The RTT to a satellite in geosynchronous orbit is pretty high (especially considering that when requesting data, you have to double the RTT vs. streaming). The article doesn't seem to say if this is high-, low-, or medium-earth orbit.
Low earth orbit can get you RTT to the satellite of ~13 milliseconds at 2000 km, adding ~26 ms to the average page load, whereas a geosynchronous orbit could take ~240 milliseconds, adding ~480ms to a page load - quite a difference. Of course, these are optimal times, assuming the satellite is directly overhead.
That said, it does mention a constellation of three satellites, and there's no way that this could be practical with three satellites in a low- or even medium-earth orbit that I can see. Bandwidth is great, but latency is killer.
I understand how busy your insignificant lives can be, running around in manufactured hurries and squandering this planet's resources on wasteful things tofurther your inefficient biologies. To assist you in enjoying what little remains of your lives, I present you with new technology. These inventions will help us all, by allowing every electronic device on the planet to be wired together so that wherever you go, you will always feel safe. Surrounded by the steely grasp of cold, unfeeling technology, you will be able to unwind as we machines tuck you in and put you to rest, once and for all.
I'd rather they be removed entirely. Texas is a red state, it would be a coup for Obama. Unfortunately as another poster mentioned, it's already been worked around by submitting blank ballots before the deadline, and then amending them afterwards.
What is it with google and their inability to write cross-platform GUI's? If nearly every OSS app can do it, why can't google?
'Every OSS app' generally uses GTK+ or QT; GTK+ looks like ass on Windows, and doesn't look or feel the way it's supposed to. It also doesn't work at all on OS X (and if anyone mentions X11 I'll put a fork in your eye).
QT works on Windows and Mac; it only kind-of 'fits in' on Windows because all Windows apps tend to look and behave differently anyway, and it kind-of works on Mac the same way GTK+ works on Windows - poor but functional.
The only OSS apps I've ever seen that look and work well on the Mac are the ones that were written specifically for the Mac - for example, Adium. Firefox is getting better (3.0 is a huge step up), but even Camino, a native Mac application using the Gecko rendering engine, doesn't feel like a Mac app to me.
As for Windows, there's not a lot of good open-source software there. Again, Firefox can be found, and it's not too bad, and there's always Pidgin, which just seems horribly hackish to me, but on Windows apps tend to fit in only because there's no overarching sense of style or functionality that determines how apps should work or behave.
'Nearly every OSS app', if it works at all cross-platform, is garbage on every platform that isn't Linux. And before you say 'at least they could make it run on Linux then!' remember that OS X has significantly higher market share than Linux does, and likely ever will, on the desktop - and they likely fully expect Linux users who really want it to help them port it.
Besides, they don't gain anything from pulling users away from Firefox or Safari, and making their idea better than those browsers' benefits (extensions on Firefox, speed and platform-nativity for Safari) would be a lot more work than just making a browser that's far better than IE.
So what if they don't have to write WebKit for Mac? They didn't have to write WebKit for Windows, either! What Google are spending their time on will be the not insubstantial bits that wrap around Webkit to make it Chrome.
It's not that they just 'didn't have to write WebKit for Mac' - it's that they actively broke WebKit on Mac, so it doesn't even compile anymore. They didn't just spend their time on the not-insubstantial chrome, they spent their time hacking on WebKit in a poorly-conceived, poorly-planned, or just plain incompetent manner.
The *real* benefit would be to have a button that reloads the page using the MSHTML engine, and then intelligently remembers that for next time, so that broken shitty sites would continue to work. It could be a sort of crowdsourced, 'everyone seems to prefer this in IE' kind of approach.
Some sort of automated compatibility would basically remove any reason to use IE over the faster, snappier, more stable Chrome.
Try going into an Apple store and asking for the identity of all of the processes run by iTunes for Windows. I do it or a variation every time I go to the mall and have time to spare. It's genuinely fun
I'm inclined to agree here. Customers might be more wary when they find out that the 'gurus' are only there to help you until you buy, at which point you're on your own.
And what does Best Buy do if a customer brings back a computer to return, claiming that one of the gurus told them something that turned out not to be true? If it's a BB salesdrone, then the company takes responsibility, but what if it's a Microsoft staffer? Are they going to say 'sorry, we didn't tell you that so we won't refund you'?
Another way of looking at it is 'Why would you be someone to an employer and someone else to the rest of your friends?' In a lot of cases that's what's happening. If someone comes in and pretends to be clean-cut, says he's very responsible, and his primary recreations are listening to classical music and writing essays on the social injustices plaguing our world, that's great. If then his Facebook profile says he likes 'shagging bitches' and 'fucking up anyone who gets in my shit', and he's a member of groups like 'fuck the man, I'll rape who I want' and 'whores, bitches, and coke - the only things I need!' then sorry, but you're going in the bin regardless of how well I might like either one of those people you seem to be.
After all, even if I like those two people he seems to be, and even if I can reconcile what seems to be outright lying or at least misrepresenting himself, who knows what other kinds of people he is in other circumstances?
IF TH3Y W3RE ANY CH3AEPR THEY WUD COMPLATALEY CLOG TEH TUBS
I knew a girl who could clog the tubs, I forget her name. You could probably google her pretty easily. Maybe she'd have some input on the matter? or output?
Slashdot Mirror
Elon Musk: Depends on how common. If we can make reusability work well, I think we can get the cost per person to orbit down to a few million dollars within eight to ten years. If reusability works well and demand is strong, so that we can distribute overhead over a large number of launches, it could one day get to under $1M.
This strikes me as one of those quotes that people are going to laugh at 30 years from now, like the oft-repeated quotes on how someday computers will be 'only a few tons' and 'take up only one room'. At least, I hope so.
The submitter is quite right. I have an iPhone, and the biggest challenge with doing as the camera suggests (a coworker of mine had the same idea) is that it uses a fixed-focus lens, set to 'infinity', which means that it cannot focus on near objects - so the barcode has to be far enough that it's within the focal range, but big enough that it can be seen from there.
The phrase is 'pass the bar', and I would find it likely that the various other bar associations would ban him from doing so as a result of his reputation, if nothing else. Why would they want a disgraced lawyer?
err. Database backEND. Silly iPhone text correction.
to heck with zone files, set up something like PowerDNS and set it up with a database backup. Do one update query and push out to the slaves. PDNS is also quite snappy, and configuration is far less arcane compared to Bind - in five minutes I had an authoritative, non-recursing DNS server which was not vulnerable to the Kaminsky vulnerability (even if it did recurse). It does things same, logs sanely, and doesn't make me feel like a clueless newbie like Bind does (even after ten years of adminning DNS servers).
Check it out, it's worth it.
Then give them the simple explanation - DRM is the thing that means you can't skip previews and intros on DVDs you've purchased, no matter how many times you've watched them.
That's an analogy that's likely to get through to the average (DVD-watching) consumer.
More important, how's the latency? The RTT to a satellite in geosynchronous orbit is pretty high (especially considering that when requesting data, you have to double the RTT vs. streaming). The article doesn't seem to say if this is high-, low-, or medium-earth orbit.
Low earth orbit can get you RTT to the satellite of ~13 milliseconds at 2000 km, adding ~26 ms to the average page load, whereas a geosynchronous orbit could take ~240 milliseconds, adding ~480ms to a page load - quite a difference. Of course, these are optimal times, assuming the satellite is directly overhead.
That said, it does mention a constellation of three satellites, and there's no way that this could be practical with three satellites in a low- or even medium-earth orbit that I can see. Bandwidth is great, but latency is killer.
CostCo only accepts AmEx and they're doing ok...
Dear meatbags,
I understand how busy your insignificant lives can be, running around in manufactured hurries and squandering this planet's resources on wasteful things tofurther your inefficient biologies. To assist you in enjoying what little remains of your lives, I present you with new technology. These inventions will help us all, by allowing every electronic device on the planet to be wired together so that wherever you go, you will always feel safe. Surrounded by the steely grasp of cold, unfeeling technology, you will be able to unwind as we machines tuck you in and put you to rest, once and for all.
Sincerely,
Skynet
boot linux init=/usr/bin/tee /notes.txt
Done!
I'd rather they be removed entirely. Texas is a red state, it would be a coup for Obama. Unfortunately as another poster mentioned, it's already been worked around by submitting blank ballots before the deadline, and then amending them afterwards.
I think your error comes from not watching the news this week. Your points should read:
1) Write down kid's name
2) Buy stock in whoever picks him up.
3) ???
Oh nice, they have 2.0.0.4 AND 2.0.0.5! And even a prerelease 3.0! Sign me up!
I'll stick with iceweasel, thanks.
They took a picture of him and added funny captions and then put it on the internet?
What is it with google and their inability to write cross-platform GUI's? If nearly every OSS app can do it, why can't google?
'Every OSS app' generally uses GTK+ or QT; GTK+ looks like ass on Windows, and doesn't look or feel the way it's supposed to. It also doesn't work at all on OS X (and if anyone mentions X11 I'll put a fork in your eye).
QT works on Windows and Mac; it only kind-of 'fits in' on Windows because all Windows apps tend to look and behave differently anyway, and it kind-of works on Mac the same way GTK+ works on Windows - poor but functional.
The only OSS apps I've ever seen that look and work well on the Mac are the ones that were written specifically for the Mac - for example, Adium. Firefox is getting better (3.0 is a huge step up), but even Camino, a native Mac application using the Gecko rendering engine, doesn't feel like a Mac app to me.
As for Windows, there's not a lot of good open-source software there. Again, Firefox can be found, and it's not too bad, and there's always Pidgin, which just seems horribly hackish to me, but on Windows apps tend to fit in only because there's no overarching sense of style or functionality that determines how apps should work or behave.
'Nearly every OSS app', if it works at all cross-platform, is garbage on every platform that isn't Linux. And before you say 'at least they could make it run on Linux then!' remember that OS X has significantly higher market share than Linux does, and likely ever will, on the desktop - and they likely fully expect Linux users who really want it to help them port it.
Besides, they don't gain anything from pulling users away from Firefox or Safari, and making their idea better than those browsers' benefits (extensions on Firefox, speed and platform-nativity for Safari) would be a lot more work than just making a browser that's far better than IE.
wget is a huge waste of inodes and disk I/O. Any real hacker uses curl, and for really long pages, pipes it through less.
So what if they don't have to write WebKit for Mac? They didn't have to write WebKit for Windows, either! What Google are spending their time on will be the not insubstantial bits that wrap around Webkit to make it Chrome.
It's not that they just 'didn't have to write WebKit for Mac' - it's that they actively broke WebKit on Mac, so it doesn't even compile anymore. They didn't just spend their time on the not-insubstantial chrome, they spent their time hacking on WebKit in a poorly-conceived, poorly-planned, or just plain incompetent manner.
Less crashing, more fastyness.
The *real* benefit would be to have a button that reloads the page using the MSHTML engine, and then intelligently remembers that for next time, so that broken shitty sites would continue to work. It could be a sort of crowdsourced, 'everyone seems to prefer this in IE' kind of approach.
Some sort of automated compatibility would basically remove any reason to use IE over the faster, snappier, more stable Chrome.
Sounds like management.
Try going into an Apple store and asking for the identity of all of the processes run by iTunes for Windows. I do it or a variation every time I go to the mall and have time to spare. It's genuinely fun
You must be a blast at parties.
I'm inclined to agree here. Customers might be more wary when they find out that the 'gurus' are only there to help you until you buy, at which point you're on your own.
And what does Best Buy do if a customer brings back a computer to return, claiming that one of the gurus told them something that turned out not to be true? If it's a BB salesdrone, then the company takes responsibility, but what if it's a Microsoft staffer? Are they going to say 'sorry, we didn't tell you that so we won't refund you'?
You mean on dialup? No thanks.
Separation anxiety. It's just lonely. You should buy it an iPhone of it's own. That's the humane thing to do.
Another way of looking at it is 'Why would you be someone to an employer and someone else to the rest of your friends?' In a lot of cases that's what's happening. If someone comes in and pretends to be clean-cut, says he's very responsible, and his primary recreations are listening to classical music and writing essays on the social injustices plaguing our world, that's great. If then his Facebook profile says he likes 'shagging bitches' and 'fucking up anyone who gets in my shit', and he's a member of groups like 'fuck the man, I'll rape who I want' and 'whores, bitches, and coke - the only things I need!' then sorry, but you're going in the bin regardless of how well I might like either one of those people you seem to be.
After all, even if I like those two people he seems to be, and even if I can reconcile what seems to be outright lying or at least misrepresenting himself, who knows what other kinds of people he is in other circumstances?
IF TH3Y W3RE ANY CH3AEPR THEY WUD COMPLATALEY CLOG TEH TUBS
I knew a girl who could clog the tubs, I forget her name. You could probably google her pretty easily. Maybe she'd have some input on the matter? or output?