I am actually interested as to why AMD machines are unstable for games
They're not. It's just that when the product you're promoting cannot compete on either price or performance, you're left with no other option than to spread FUD (fear, uncertainty, doubt.) The great thing about FUD is that it is completely abstract and imaginary, and cannot be measured.
Even if you shut down the lander until Cassini is back in range, you have to warm it up (from about 70K). Since it's not mobile, there isn't a lot you can do over time with a payload of its size. You'd just end up taking the same readings over and over. It might be nice to have data on the landing site over time, but you're not going to be able to power the lander for such a period. I don't think even an RTG would be of much use.
A RTG would do just fine. They last such a long time that power wouldn't be an issue. Cassini gets its power from a RTG, and so did the Voyager craft. The Voyager craft have been operating for over 27 years now.
The question at hand is whether that there may be a biological reason why more women don't excel at math. It's about looking at the numbers as a whole and seeing if biology has a statistical influence. If that's the case- prove it. If it's not the case- prove it. It did not, however, say that all women are bad at math.
I think some people are getting all worked up about this and are giving their emotional outcries. That doesn't say anything- I want to see facts.
It seems like you are making judgements on the reactions you are seeing, and not on the substance of the issue at hand.
I'm sure if the issue was as cut and dry as you say it is, it would be very easy to provide irrefutable evidence that shows him to be wrong. I don't have the answer, but I think it's worth finding it. Running away from the issue crying "un-PC!" isn't the way to handle it.
Scientific answers are the solutions to scientific questions. Emotional outcries solve nothing.
It seems that nowadays, there are some things that you cannot say, no matter if they're true or not. That's just the political climate that we're living in.
It also seems that "normal" people- those who simple believe or don't believe something yet don't get worked up about it- don't have much of a voice even though they comprise the vast majority. It's usually the lunatic fringe on both sides which seem hell-bent on making themselves heard. It seems that the lunatics are more likely to declare those issues their life's goal.
I don't get worked up about issues like these, but I'll voice my opinion anyway even at the risk of both sides attacking me.
People have to be fooling themselves if they think that everybody performs the same at all functions, across all genders and races. I believe in evolution (here come the attacks from the far right), and I believe that over time different races and the sexes have evolved to excel at slightly different tasks (here come the atacks from the far left).
If you think that the hormones running through your veins don't have any effect on the way you think, you're mistaken. I'm a man, and I will admit that women are right when they say that testosterone makes men more aggressive and violent. Is there really any disputing that? Yet some ultra-sensitive male advocacy groups would take great offense to that.
We're different, face it.
I will end my post by saying that just because something isn't PC doesn't mean it's necessarily false. It just means that there are some people that don't want to hear what may be the truth and they'll get very emotional about the issue.
But I do add my opinion / grain of salt when I can, which most science news site don't take the time to do / don't have the expertise necessary to understand.
That is what ruins blogs. There is absolutely no objectivity. While you might try to keep the news as accurate as possible, someone else might just try to spin the news their own way. It leaves the reader not knowing what to believe.
That would be cheaper, or we could replace the weight with something more useful than fuel.
It didn't have any fuel on it. It wasn't a powered landing. It just floated down on its parachute and hit the ground at 15 mph.
It's due to bandwidth and transmit time mostly.
on
Titan Photos and Sounds
·
· Score: 3, Informative
They only had a data rate of 8Kb/sec to work with, and the probe wasn't going to be able to broadcast for long. So the pictures had to be very low res.
They could have easily taken better pictures, but the data wouldn't have been able to make it back to Cassini with the throughput and amount of time they had.
Remember that Huygens was to sink beneath the waves rapidly, but as it sank, it would take pictures of the ocean? So much for the wisdom of the scientists!
They never said that. In fact, they designed the probe to float in case it did land in liquid. How would it send data back if it's sunken beneath the waves?
I was reading the specs on the cameras onboard, and the resolution is very low. There is only 1 imaging chip onboard, which has a resolution of around 512x512, and it's shared by 3 different lenses via fiber optic cables.. so you can guess just how high the res from the pictures will be.
Sounds like a microphone with the gain turned up way too high. I think the reason for that is that it was tuned to listen for thunder, and they didn't hear any.
Those darkish rivers and that ocean may prove to be rich in hydrocarbons.
The Bush administration has issued a memo stating that a spy satellite (codename: Cassini) has revealed WMD stashed on Titan. There is also information trickling in that Titan itself may be communist. A joint NASA/Halliburton mission is planned to liberate it.
Basically, the pictures were already in, but the ESA wouldn't show them and they didn't want others to show them, either. NASA had some of them up on their website after only a couple of hours, but the ESA had them take the pictures down.
I could understand it if they just didn't have the data downloaded yet, or didn't have time to post them on their website- you can't blame them for that. But we can blame them for forcing others who had the pictures posted to take them down.
I could understand if they just didn't have the time to put up the pictures yet, but that doesn't seem to be the case here. NASA had some of the pictures up on their website a little while ago, and the ESA made them take the pics off.
So it seems that they don't have time to put the pictures up on their site, but somehow they do have the time to tell those who already did post the pics to take them down.
..while the lander is there for some 3 hours already, maybe under water, maybe in pieces...
The rover sent back data for over 2 hours after landing, so it's not in pieces. It's also not under water because water would be ice at that temperature, and besides- it was designed to float.
One can be compliant with both the federal law (which permits assisted suicide) and the state law (which allows it), by simply not engaging in it.
That's really getting semantical about it. Technically, by logical definition, yes, you can technically choose be compliant with both. But realistically no, you didn't have a choice to begin with. A "choice" is only a choice if you can choose from more than one option. If one law says you have a choice in the matter and the other law says you have no choice, then you have no choice because there are no alternatives to choose from. That's like Henry Ford saying "You can buy a car in whatever color you want, as long as it's black". "Mandatory volunteering" comes to mind.
Or do you believe that a majority of the people who live on your street can decide whether or not they need to pay taxes?
The constitution doesn't allow individual streets to make their own laws. But it does allow individual states to make their own laws. The entire idea behind the US government was that the federal goverment loosely controls the indivual states, but those states govern themselves. The idea was to have no centralized micromanagement:
[t]he powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite - James Madison
The states made the laws, but Congress of the federal government had the power to override the states on the few important issues that they decided to take.
Over the years, though, the government has bastardized those ideas and grabbed the power away from the states. Now the trend seems to be the federal government managing the people directly, and the amount of power of the individual states compared to the federal government is decreasing.
It's sort of like if you were a manager and were responsible for managing your employees, and you had a manager that oversaw you. Then your manager began to manage your employees directly, and used his power to override you when you objected, slowly cutting you out of the loop.
It tells us something about their general character, you worthless piece of shit. I am less inclined to take their complaints seriously with the knowledge that they are out on a bender in their daddy's pickup on a week night.
Stupid red stater.
That's not how the legal system works. You can't demonize the person standing trial in an attempt to abridge their rights.
Red stater? I'm in a blue state, and I voted for Kerry.
The probe was built by the ESA, not NASA. Cassini is NASA, Huygens probe is ESA.
And NASA's Mars rovers are still going strong, whereas the ESA's Beagle is just a crater.
That was just a grandfather clause
on
Newsy Numbers
·
· Score: 1
You're right about that, but in reality it essentially banned all alcohol. That was mostly a grandfather clause for people who had a few bottles still in their possession when the law took effect.
If you couldn't buy liquor or import it, how could you possess it in your own house and consume it throughout prohibition? It would have ran out fairly quickly.
And if you did have a big enough stockpile in your house to last throughout prohibition, you'd probably get busted for intent to sell, because seriously, who keeps a 13 year supply of booze at their house?
Rather, a better reason for obeying laws, and in my opinion the best reason, is that they are created by a government of the people, by the people, and for the people.
This isn't always the case. There have been a few issues, such as laws allowing doctor assisted suicide and medical marijuana that were voted for by the majority of the people, and the federal government basically shot them down and they that they can't do that. Even though the original plan was to have individual states be allowed to pass their own laws, the federal government is slowly taking those powers away. This isn't exactly a revelation, it's just human nature. Those with more power tend to take power away from those with less power, even if they're supposed to be on the same team.
Slashdot Mirror
The Athlon-XP and Athlon-64 both integrate memory and I/O controllers into the processor.
You're thinking of the Opteron and the Athlon 64. The Athlon XP is the older architecture and doesn't have either of these integrated onto the CPU.
I am actually interested as to why AMD machines are unstable for games
They're not. It's just that when the product you're promoting cannot compete on either price or performance, you're left with no other option than to spread FUD (fear, uncertainty, doubt.) The great thing about FUD is that it is completely abstract and imaginary, and cannot be measured.
Even if you shut down the lander until Cassini is back in range, you have to warm it up (from about 70K). Since it's not mobile, there isn't a lot you can do over time with a payload of its size. You'd just end up taking the same readings over and over. It might be nice to have data on the landing site over time, but you're not going to be able to power the lander for such a period. I don't think even an RTG would be of much use.
A RTG would do just fine. They last such a long time that power wouldn't be an issue. Cassini gets its power from a RTG, and so did the Voyager craft. The Voyager craft have been operating for over 27 years now.
The question at hand is whether that there may be a biological reason why more women don't excel at math. It's about looking at the numbers as a whole and seeing if biology has a statistical influence. If that's the case- prove it. If it's not the case- prove it. It did not, however, say that all women are bad at math.
I think some people are getting all worked up about this and are giving their emotional outcries. That doesn't say anything- I want to see facts.
It seems like you are making judgements on the reactions you are seeing, and not on the substance of the issue at hand.
I'm sure if the issue was as cut and dry as you say it is, it would be very easy to provide irrefutable evidence that shows him to be wrong. I don't have the answer, but I think it's worth finding it. Running away from the issue crying "un-PC!" isn't the way to handle it.
Scientific answers are the solutions to scientific questions. Emotional outcries solve nothing.
It seems that nowadays, there are some things that you cannot say, no matter if they're true or not. That's just the political climate that we're living in.
It also seems that "normal" people- those who simple believe or don't believe something yet don't get worked up about it- don't have much of a voice even though they comprise the vast majority. It's usually the lunatic fringe on both sides which seem hell-bent on making themselves heard. It seems that the lunatics are more likely to declare those issues their life's goal.
I don't get worked up about issues like these, but I'll voice my opinion anyway even at the risk of both sides attacking me.
People have to be fooling themselves if they think that everybody performs the same at all functions, across all genders and races. I believe in evolution (here come the attacks from the far right), and I believe that over time different races and the sexes have evolved to excel at slightly different tasks (here come the atacks from the far left).
If you think that the hormones running through your veins don't have any effect on the way you think, you're mistaken. I'm a man, and I will admit that women are right when they say that testosterone makes men more aggressive and violent. Is there really any disputing that? Yet some ultra-sensitive male advocacy groups would take great offense to that.
We're different, face it.
I will end my post by saying that just because something isn't PC doesn't mean it's necessarily false. It just means that there are some people that don't want to hear what may be the truth and they'll get very emotional about the issue.
But I do add my opinion / grain of salt when I can, which most science news site don't take the time to do / don't have the expertise necessary to understand.
That is what ruins blogs. There is absolutely no objectivity. While you might try to keep the news as accurate as possible, someone else might just try to spin the news their own way. It leaves the reader not knowing what to believe.
The A380 is bigger and heavier almost in every respect. The C5 is a little bit longer, but not by much.
C5
Wingspan- 222 feet, 9 inches
Length- 247 feet, 10 inches
Height- 65 feet, 1 inch
Max Weight- 840,000 pounds
A380
Wingspan- 261 feet, 10 inches
Length- 239 feet, 6 inches
Height- 79 feet, 1 inch
Max weight- 1,208,000 pounds
But both come up short to the An-225.
That would be cheaper, or we could replace the weight with something more useful than fuel.
It didn't have any fuel on it. It wasn't a powered landing. It just floated down on its parachute and hit the ground at 15 mph.
They only had a data rate of 8Kb/sec to work with, and the probe wasn't going to be able to broadcast for long. So the pictures had to be very low res.
They could have easily taken better pictures, but the data wouldn't have been able to make it back to Cassini with the throughput and amount of time they had.
It sounds like a recording of silence with the gain turned up too high to me.
Remember that Huygens was to sink beneath the waves rapidly, but as it sank, it would take pictures of the ocean? So much for the wisdom of the scientists!
They never said that. In fact, they designed the probe to float in case it did land in liquid. How would it send data back if it's sunken beneath the waves?
I was reading the specs on the cameras onboard, and the resolution is very low. There is only 1 imaging chip onboard, which has a resolution of around 512x512, and it's shared by 3 different lenses via fiber optic cables.. so you can guess just how high the res from the pictures will be.
Sounds like a microphone with the gain turned up way too high. I think the reason for that is that it was tuned to listen for thunder, and they didn't hear any.
Those darkish rivers and that ocean may prove to be rich in hydrocarbons.
The Bush administration has issued a memo stating that a spy satellite (codename: Cassini) has revealed WMD stashed on Titan. There is also information trickling in that Titan itself may be communist. A joint NASA/Halliburton mission is planned to liberate it.
Read my reply about that a few posts up:
0 56 &cid=11368783
http://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=136
Basically, the pictures were already in, but the ESA wouldn't show them and they didn't want others to show them, either. NASA had some of them up on their website after only a couple of hours, but the ESA had them take the pictures down.
I could understand it if they just didn't have the data downloaded yet, or didn't have time to post them on their website- you can't blame them for that. But we can blame them for forcing others who had the pictures posted to take them down.
I could understand if they just didn't have the time to put up the pictures yet, but that doesn't seem to be the case here. NASA had some of the pictures up on their website a little while ago, and the ESA made them take the pics off.
So it seems that they don't have time to put the pictures up on their site, but somehow they do have the time to tell those who already did post the pics to take them down.
The rover sent back data for over 2 hours after landing, so it's not in pieces. It's also not under water because water would be ice at that temperature, and besides- it was designed to float.
Didn't someone post a week or so ago that some people were trying to detect Huygens' signal directly from Earth?
I think it was in the thread about HAM radio operators setting the record about longest distance per watt of output.
That would be amazing if they really were able to detect and record the data it sent back.
I can't wait to see the results (and hopefully pictures)
:-(
Too bad they put such a low resolution imager on it
One can be compliant with both the federal law (which permits assisted suicide) and the state law (which allows it), by simply not engaging in it.
That's really getting semantical about it. Technically, by logical definition, yes, you can technically choose be compliant with both. But realistically no, you didn't have a choice to begin with. A "choice" is only a choice if you can choose from more than one option. If one law says you have a choice in the matter and the other law says you have no choice, then you have no choice because there are no alternatives to choose from. That's like Henry Ford saying "You can buy a car in whatever color you want, as long as it's black". "Mandatory volunteering" comes to mind.
Or do you believe that a majority of the people who live on your street can decide whether or not they need to pay taxes?
The constitution doesn't allow individual streets to make their own laws. But it does allow individual states to make their own laws. The entire idea behind the US government was that the federal goverment loosely controls the indivual states, but those states govern themselves. The idea was to have no centralized micromanagement:
[t]he powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite - James Madison
The states made the laws, but Congress of the federal government had the power to override the states on the few important issues that they decided to take.
Over the years, though, the government has bastardized those ideas and grabbed the power away from the states. Now the trend seems to be the federal government managing the people directly, and the amount of power of the individual states compared to the federal government is decreasing.
It's sort of like if you were a manager and were responsible for managing your employees, and you had a manager that oversaw you. Then your manager began to manage your employees directly, and used his power to override you when you objected, slowly cutting you out of the loop.
It tells us something about their general character, you worthless piece of shit. I am less inclined to take their complaints seriously with the knowledge that they are out on a bender in their daddy's pickup on a week night.
Stupid red stater.
That's not how the legal system works. You can't demonize the person standing trial in an attempt to abridge their rights.
Red stater? I'm in a blue state, and I voted for Kerry.
The probe was built by the ESA, not NASA. Cassini is NASA, Huygens probe is ESA.
And NASA's Mars rovers are still going strong, whereas the ESA's Beagle is just a crater.
You're right about that, but in reality it essentially banned all alcohol. That was mostly a grandfather clause for people who had a few bottles still in their possession when the law took effect.
If you couldn't buy liquor or import it, how could you possess it in your own house and consume it throughout prohibition? It would have ran out fairly quickly.
And if you did have a big enough stockpile in your house to last throughout prohibition, you'd probably get busted for intent to sell, because seriously, who keeps a 13 year supply of booze at their house?
Rather, a better reason for obeying laws, and in my opinion the best reason, is that they are created by a government of the people, by the people, and for the people.
This isn't always the case. There have been a few issues, such as laws allowing doctor assisted suicide and medical marijuana that were voted for by the majority of the people, and the federal government basically shot them down and they that they can't do that. Even though the original plan was to have individual states be allowed to pass their own laws, the federal government is slowly taking those powers away. This isn't exactly a revelation, it's just human nature. Those with more power tend to take power away from those with less power, even if they're supposed to be on the same team.