Somehow, it just doesn't come across when the man speaks in public. Yes, I chose the word "seemingly" with some care, as I've often had to remind my (very liberal) friends that regardless of the general opinion, President Bush is in fact an educated man.
if I'd rather be a Tastycrat or a Fingerlican. Guess I'll join the Apathy Party!
Gotta love it though . . . an equal opportunity dirty trick. Doesn't take Republican wealth or Democratic hyperbole to make it work . . . just a few web-savvy operators with an agenda. No more duct tape on the door latches at the Watergate Hotel! No more pictures of Michael "already supersized" Moore touting his latest mocumentary! No need to have "my brother, the Governer" or the Supremes hand over the election! No more . . . but you get the idea.
While I don't expect DOD-funded research to produce private-sector gains anytime soon (mostly CLASSIFIED research I think, yes?), you're quite right to point out that there are literally TENS OF BILLIONS of dollars annually wasted on pork-barrel projects, ill-concieved federal programs and outright graft/fraud. Such a shame that we can't just divert even two percent of that to NASA (which is actually a very small slice of the federal budget pie).
that this administration is about to junk a working piece of very expensive technology because our Commander-in-Chief evidently doesn't understand the value of the scientific work this machine can still accomplish?
Aside from the fact that we've already stopped funding work on the only two space probes in human history to hit the heliopause and still be capable of producing usable data for analysis?
Aside from the fact that we're spending tremendously greater sums to prosecute a two-front war with debatable benefits and at best lukewarm approval from the voting public?
That reminds me - why did we abandon work with the Voyager probes, which were still providing new scientific insights into the nature of our solar system? Was it because we had a new, better probe questing towards the heliopause? Don't tell me we couldn't afford 'em - after all, they were both already up and running, built, paid for, launched, working, and still costing less per year than one day at war in the Middle East.
Let me guess - you're gonna buy a new PC when Vista ships, because upgrading your old XP machine wouldn't be as cool, right? That does seem to be the logic of your position.
...While a great many things can be hidden away in a budget as vast as the US Federal government's there is considerable political danger in diverting money to something unpopular.
Something popular - like the two-front war we're waging in and around the Middle East?;^)
But I'm afraid you're right - our government has historically spent arount two to three hundred times more on our military than on scientific exploration. The Pentagon could practically fund NASA at twice it's current budget from their "petty cash" drawer! How is this hidden? Simple - keep rerunning footage of the disastrous attacks of 9/11. Keep the sheeple from looking too hard at where the money really goes. "Don't look at my left hand! Look at my right hand, where we're getting back on track to mine Mars for diamonds and uranium!"
Hell, I'm just suffering a sour stomach today - I am beginning to think that private space exploration offers a better hope to put mankind out there among the planets (the stars will have to come later). The government (in my opinion) shouldn't be so quick to abandon a multi-million dollar piece of equipment just because of the cost of upkeep. This is like junking a two year old Lamborghini because the tires are worn out and because we want to own a fleet of semi tractor-trailers instead. Note that I said junking, nost selling!
wants to relive the heady days of the space race and the Apollo program - President Dubya is tired of this "Science for the sake of knowledge" stuff and wants to put men on the Moon and Mars.
Besides, our current president is (seemingly) not quite sharp enought to get most of what science discovers using the HST. He'd rather have "feet on the ground" as it were, telling him things like "We've landed and claimed Mars in the name of the USA" rather than "We've made a startling discovery regarding the dynamics of planetary formation within stellar nurseries".
That said, maybe it is time we went back to the true promise of space exploration - getting mankind out into the Galaxy. There is a certain attraction to the notion of manned space exploration versus robotic/remote methods. Certainly a kind of heroic appeal to the act itself; and all of our robotic/remote exploration was and is intended to ultimately pave the way for manned exploration anyhow. Perhaps we know enough now to take those first tenative steps into space.
Like most coins, this one appears to have two sides.
Granted, installing WinXP followed by the latest SP's from CD-ROM is a secure way to install a machine with some measure of confidence that it won't be hacked immediately upon exposure to the internet, but . ..
Most people who are responsible for such systems are presumably intelligent enough to slipstream the latest Service Pack AND all current security patches onto a WinXP installation CD which can then be used to install a machine - in fact, this would be the recommended procedure, as it results not only in the machine having the latest SP from the start but also all the miscellaneous security updates which have been published since the last SP.
Remember, a fresh install of Windows XP + Service Pack 2 is still vulnerable to known exploits. Being able to incorporate all the security updates which are available at the time the machine is brought online results in a signifigantly more secure situation (although Microsoft's well-documented history of ignoring certain inconvenient security holes until they get their collective nose rubbed in them would still make me nervous, personally).
Of course, this only works for i386 versions of Windows - from what I can gather, it's not possible to slipstream the x86_64 version. If I've got that wrong, somebody please correct me (and provide a link to instructions).
There's an old quote somewhere to the effect "The price of Liberty is eternal vigilance". Here in the USA we (theoretically) acknowledge that all speech, even speech which is abhorrent or disgusting, must be protected as free. It is the duty of the citizens of a free land to critically analyze and interpret such speech and decide for themselves how to respond.
Granted, there is a second edge to this sword - when that speech is likely to directly impact the rights of others (by inciting hate crimes, for example) it is necessary to limit the individual right of free expression in favor of the collective right to personal safety and liberty. Google may or may not be in the right here, but I doubt seriously that Google actively shares the viewpoints represented in these blogs.
Besides, this strikes me as a great way to keep track of sub-mental gene-damaged inbred neo-nazi pinheads. I say, let Google leave these blogs in place for all to see. As a Jew, I find their speech to be both reprehensible and frightening; but I'd rather know who and where these morons are from their blogs than to find out the hard way when they resort to terrorism to disseminate their ideology.
. . . I honestly had a good laugh when it first came around. The laughing stopped when my community took it seriously . ..
So, let me guess - you also laughed when the POSIX standard was announced, right? How 'bout the TCP/IP stack? ACID is based directly upon the W3 standards; any other standards you find unbearably humorous?
Say, before you answer . . . do you work with technology, or are you another one of them PHB's?
TFA suggests that they expect to be able to extend the range upwards from microwave towards visible light. Is there a fundamental limit on how high in the e/m spectrum this technique can be made useful for? I understand that right now they're working with microwave radiation, but is that a limit of 1) the physical properties of the radiation/material interaction, 2) the physical limitation on our abilities to produce materials with sufficiently detailed microstructure or 3) a limitation of our ability to correctly determine how to use which materials to do this across a given range of frequencies?
I remember when Darpanet was being developed as a military technology to interconnect disparate computing platforms for the express purpose of improving the flow of intelligence throughout the US Armed Forces. Hardly looks like the modern internet now, does it?
Without debating the practical aspects of invisibility, I do have to wonder if this could be useful as some sort of radiation shielding? If they're able to do it for more energetic forms of e/m than microwave radiation, it seems to me that it would make an excellent shield. It doesn't have to be perfect invisibility, allowing me to "peek out" of the shield is fine. It doesn't even have to be non-detectable - I don't mind a visible "energy distortion" or "energy turbulence" or whatever - I just don't want to get fried.
Yes, I know - this won't do that much against baryonic radiation, but for e/m . . .
This looks like it could be the ultimate media center PC with a Blu-ray re-writer
With a SONY product in it? Wait, lemme guess - it comes pre-rooted from the factory, right? No need to purchase any audio CD's from Sony? Yeah, this is the ultimate media center PC - if, by ultimate you mean "Ultimately pwned by the *AA"!
Not that HD-DVD is much better at this point, except that I don't recall anybody having their machine rooted (administered? pwned?) by a HD-DVD manufacturer. The DRM being built into HD media is onerous at best, intolerable at worst.
No, I think I'll just limp along on good old DVD's and NTSC television on my PC for now - at least on my Linux box, I know everybody who has root authority (hint: "root" is the only one on that list). How many people who buy a computer MADE BY SONY will ever be able to claim that they know everyone who has administrator authority on their machine? Hellfire, there are a lot of people who only bought CD's made by Sony that can't even make that claim! Now, they think consumers will be dumb enough to buy a machine made by them?
Did you even read the article? It seemed to be from a reputable source, reporting current, important information of interest not only to/.'ers but to the world community. The article was concise, reasonably well written and dealt not with some incredibly distant possible technology but rather with a technology which could very soon be in routine use in oncology centers around the world.
I don't care if Roland Piquepaille is a shameless whore, trying to drive hits and business to his website (although I didn't see any of that in this article). In this instance, he has posted an article which is reasonably intelligent, reasonably presented (clicked through thirty pages of NYT to read thirty paragraphs of a story lately?), and likely to be of interest to/.'s target audience. What's your major malfunction, maggot?
Then again, I suppose the name "anonymous coward" says it all, eh?
Of course internet traffic can reliably be measured, but the actual amount of content ever making it past human eyeballs can't (do the words "adblock" and "clickfraud" ring any bells?).
Then again, who cares if the marketing drones of the world want to live in a fool's paradise? That's exactly where they belong!
And evidence to support your theory? Evidence which negates the currently accepted theory? Evidence which can be readily reproduced by scientists skeptical about your theory?
I thought not.
Not all scientists accept Kant's theories regarding planetary evolution as correct. Even the scientists who do accepts Kant's theories as correct (and they are the overwhelming majority) will be the first to admit that they are theories. That's the nature of science.
Yes, the theory is still unproven - but it is well-supported, and this data from the HST provides even more support. Scientists haven't "jumped to unsupported conclusions" - they've (quite correctly) described this data as supporting an existing theory, not as proof or evidence of a fact.
Yes, TFA describes these things as facts, rather than theory. Blame the journalists, not the scientists.
To be sure, an autistic may or may not be responsive to personal closeness (a hug) - if I recall correctly, autism's primary impact is on the ability to relate to and communicate with others?
This vest can't really give a "hug" - there is no emotional dynamic there. However, I believe people suffering from autism often hug or rock themselves: the term is "autostimulation". If this vest can provide that stimulation, it may well give some autism sufferers the help they need to cope with their disorder.
I am not a psychologist, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night!
How many posts have you ever see including words to the effect "I was going to post but changed my mind"? This is NOT the same as verbal conversation, where utterances flow straight from brain to mouth without obstruction - here, there is typing and consideration (theoretically). This forum can't be described as "casual speech".
Slashdot Mirror
Ohhh, my head hurts! Where's that Klien bottle of aspirin?
Somehow, it just doesn't come across when the man speaks in public. Yes, I chose the word "seemingly" with some care, as I've often had to remind my (very liberal) friends that regardless of the general opinion, President Bush is in fact an educated man.
Gotta love it though . . . an equal opportunity dirty trick. Doesn't take Republican wealth or Democratic hyperbole to make it work . . . just a few web-savvy operators with an agenda. No more duct tape on the door latches at the Watergate Hotel! No more pictures of Michael "already supersized" Moore touting his latest mocumentary! No need to have "my brother, the Governer" or the Supremes hand over the election! No more . . . but you get the idea.
While I don't expect DOD-funded research to produce private-sector gains anytime soon (mostly CLASSIFIED research I think, yes?), you're quite right to point out that there are literally TENS OF BILLIONS of dollars annually wasted on pork-barrel projects, ill-concieved federal programs and outright graft/fraud. Such a shame that we can't just divert even two percent of that to NASA (which is actually a very small slice of the federal budget pie).
Aside from the fact that we've already stopped funding work on the only two space probes in human history to hit the heliopause and still be capable of producing usable data for analysis?
Aside from the fact that we're spending tremendously greater sums to prosecute a two-front war with debatable benefits and at best lukewarm approval from the voting public?
Oh, you wanted a link! Here you go!.
That reminds me - why did we abandon work with the Voyager probes, which were still providing new scientific insights into the nature of our solar system? Was it because we had a new, better probe questing towards the heliopause? Don't tell me we couldn't afford 'em - after all, they were both already up and running, built, paid for, launched, working, and still costing less per year than one day at war in the Middle East.
Let me guess - you're gonna buy a new PC when Vista ships, because upgrading your old XP machine wouldn't be as cool, right? That does seem to be the logic of your position.
Just trying to see obverse and reverse, that's all.
Something popular - like the two-front war we're waging in and around the Middle East? ;^)
But I'm afraid you're right - our government has historically spent arount two to three hundred times more on our military than on scientific exploration. The Pentagon could practically fund NASA at twice it's current budget from their "petty cash" drawer! How is this hidden? Simple - keep rerunning footage of the disastrous attacks of 9/11. Keep the sheeple from looking too hard at where the money really goes. "Don't look at my left hand! Look at my right hand, where we're getting back on track to mine Mars for diamonds and uranium!"
Hell, I'm just suffering a sour stomach today - I am beginning to think that private space exploration offers a better hope to put mankind out there among the planets (the stars will have to come later). The government (in my opinion) shouldn't be so quick to abandon a multi-million dollar piece of equipment just because of the cost of upkeep. This is like junking a two year old Lamborghini because the tires are worn out and because we want to own a fleet of semi tractor-trailers instead. Note that I said junking, nost selling!
Besides, our current president is (seemingly) not quite sharp enought to get most of what science discovers using the HST. He'd rather have "feet on the ground" as it were, telling him things like "We've landed and claimed Mars in the name of the USA" rather than "We've made a startling discovery regarding the dynamics of planetary formation within stellar nurseries".
That said, maybe it is time we went back to the true promise of space exploration - getting mankind out into the Galaxy. There is a certain attraction to the notion of manned space exploration versus robotic/remote methods. Certainly a kind of heroic appeal to the act itself; and all of our robotic/remote exploration was and is intended to ultimately pave the way for manned exploration anyhow. Perhaps we know enough now to take those first tenative steps into space.
Like most coins, this one appears to have two sides.
Most people who are responsible for such systems are presumably intelligent enough to slipstream the latest Service Pack AND all current security patches onto a WinXP installation CD which can then be used to install a machine - in fact, this would be the recommended procedure, as it results not only in the machine having the latest SP from the start but also all the miscellaneous security updates which have been published since the last SP.
Remember, a fresh install of Windows XP + Service Pack 2 is still vulnerable to known exploits. Being able to incorporate all the security updates which are available at the time the machine is brought online results in a signifigantly more secure situation (although Microsoft's well-documented history of ignoring certain inconvenient security holes until they get their collective nose rubbed in them would still make me nervous, personally).
Of course, this only works for i386 versions of Windows - from what I can gather, it's not possible to slipstream the x86_64 version. If I've got that wrong, somebody please correct me (and provide a link to instructions).
Granted, there is a second edge to this sword - when that speech is likely to directly impact the rights of others (by inciting hate crimes, for example) it is necessary to limit the individual right of free expression in favor of the collective right to personal safety and liberty. Google may or may not be in the right here, but I doubt seriously that Google actively shares the viewpoints represented in these blogs.
Besides, this strikes me as a great way to keep track of sub-mental gene-damaged inbred neo-nazi pinheads. I say, let Google leave these blogs in place for all to see. As a Jew, I find their speech to be both reprehensible and frightening; but I'd rather know who and where these morons are from their blogs than to find out the hard way when they resort to terrorism to disseminate their ideology.
Especially anonymous cowards.
Hellfire, even George Lucas seems to get it, and he's a lo-o-ong way from being technically proficient.
So, let me guess - you also laughed when the POSIX standard was announced, right? How 'bout the TCP/IP stack? ACID is based directly upon the W3 standards; any other standards you find unbearably humorous?
Say, before you answer . . . do you work with technology, or are you another one of them PHB's?
Then again, by the time we develop an FTL drive (if we ever develop an FTL drive), this technology or its descendent technology could be useful.
I remember when Darpanet was being developed as a military technology to interconnect disparate computing platforms for the express purpose of improving the flow of intelligence throughout the US Armed Forces. Hardly looks like the modern internet now, does it?
Yes, I know - this won't do that much against baryonic radiation, but for e/m . . .
With a SONY product in it? Wait, lemme guess - it comes pre-rooted from the factory, right? No need to purchase any audio CD's from Sony? Yeah, this is the ultimate media center PC - if, by ultimate you mean "Ultimately pwned by the *AA"!
Not that HD-DVD is much better at this point, except that I don't recall anybody having their machine rooted (administered? pwned?) by a HD-DVD manufacturer. The DRM being built into HD media is onerous at best, intolerable at worst.
No, I think I'll just limp along on good old DVD's and NTSC television on my PC for now - at least on my Linux box, I know everybody who has root authority (hint: "root" is the only one on that list). How many people who buy a computer MADE BY SONY will ever be able to claim that they know everyone who has administrator authority on their machine? Hellfire, there are a lot of people who only bought CD's made by Sony that can't even make that claim! Now, they think consumers will be dumb enough to buy a machine made by them?
Damn! They're probably right.
I don't care if Roland Piquepaille is a shameless whore, trying to drive hits and business to his website (although I didn't see any of that in this article). In this instance, he has posted an article which is reasonably intelligent, reasonably presented (clicked through thirty pages of NYT to read thirty paragraphs of a story lately?), and likely to be of interest to /.'s target audience. What's your major malfunction, maggot?
Then again, I suppose the name "anonymous coward" says it all, eh?
Then again, who cares if the marketing drones of the world want to live in a fool's paradise? That's exactly where they belong!
Oh, and BTW - FIRST POST!
but, erm, ever heard of Blue Gene ? We use plenty of POWER architecture machines and chips here!
Stay right where you are. Personnel will be along presently to, er, explain why this is a Good Thing. You will understand then.
I thought not.
Not all scientists accept Kant's theories regarding planetary evolution as correct. Even the scientists who do accepts Kant's theories as correct (and they are the overwhelming majority) will be the first to admit that they are theories. That's the nature of science.
Yes, the theory is still unproven - but it is well-supported, and this data from the HST provides even more support. Scientists haven't "jumped to unsupported conclusions" - they've (quite correctly) described this data as supporting an existing theory, not as proof or evidence of a fact.
Yes, TFA describes these things as facts, rather than theory. Blame the journalists, not the scientists.
This vest can't really give a "hug" - there is no emotional dynamic there. However, I believe people suffering from autism often hug or rock themselves: the term is "autostimulation". If this vest can provide that stimulation, it may well give some autism sufferers the help they need to cope with their disorder.
I am not a psychologist, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night!
How many posts have you ever see including words to the effect "I was going to post but changed my mind"? This is NOT the same as verbal conversation, where utterances flow straight from brain to mouth without obstruction - here, there is typing and consideration (theoretically). This forum can't be described as "casual speech".