All donuts turn out to be defective is shown by extensive research. The random sample taken (500) in several countries, have shown that all donuts have a hole in the middle.
Since the problem is so widespread and since there does not seem to be a regulatory body concerning the properties of a donut, congressional inquiries can almost not be avoided.
In other news: Martha Stewart proposes American Donut Standard Association
Adjust an excisting MS/Linux/other PDA with the software required to enter the secure network, and rewrite some drivers to bring the software up to date with . the emerging (BUDGETOVERFLOW DETECTED) secure communications standards. The only hardware change seems to be the Defense access card integration.
Somehow it feels like this device is going to cause a lot of embarrasment later when one gets in the wrong hands and breaks all the security at once.
Anyway: As you point out yourself too luckily: It is the design (irregular shape etc) which increases temperature problems and with that ice formation. With LOX/LH2 rockets there is a very simple solution in use against ice: Just launch the rocket, the ice falls of at launch, and since there is almost nothing it can fatally hit on the way down, or which will be used again, it is not an issue.
Ablative properties: Sorry, I was thinking the wrong way around in the release order of the tank and the thrusters. The tank is long enough in flight to cause serious aerodynamic heat problems + sufficient heating from the engines & thrusters.
Last: I do not see the difference in driving a shuttle for several miles, or some walls for the same distance, heck the walls are cheaper and most likely lighter (per piece), so there is less risk in moving those around instead of the shuttle. Plus you can do all the preflight checks in a better protected environment.
MD5 is a hashing method, and ofcourse you can look up the hashes again. It is just a quick and dirty way of encoding your passwords in php, or to check if a file is really that file which you were expecting. It is not for real password encryption use.
Anyway: MD5 hashes over a certain dataset are not unique. Two datasets can result in the same MD5 hash, assuming a fixed has length. This database could point those out too.
As last remark: This kind of database use has been done before by chess engines. By just storing most succesful board setups, the next moves could be executed more effectively and a lot faster.
So that is why one of the suggestions is to change the situation in which the shuttle stays prelaunch. In other words: change the staging area into the physical path. So instead of moving the shuttle around in a complex way, move the walls away in another complext way.
What if someone else runs the data through stego to see if something is hidden. That way anybody can find the hidden data. Ok, you can password protect it, but how good is stego in that? If gets really interesting to see if that is hackable.
Ok, you are right, in the new world order, must is maybe a bit to strong. I will replace that with: If you have a homemade movie, you should be allowed to pay a "DRM play you own movie license (unlimitted available for extra fee)" after a committee checks your movie license.
If you have a homemade movie you must be able to play that. So it looks to me that a monitor with DRM is pretty much not doing anything to stop you from watching your ripped movie which has the same parameters as your homemade movie. The screendrivers do not need to be hacked for that.
The DRM probably has use in companies like for protecting documents, but I can not imagine how yet, and why that should happen at monitor level. Maybe a document can be sent around and you can open it but not display it? Pretty useless, lets not be able to open it than anyway, much more efficient.
I think they just added this DRM line for the sake of hollywood. VESA headoffice: If we add DRM to our statement of better resolutions, and bandwidth for this new standard, then we might get less opposition from Hollywood who is afraid of copies, or they might even sponsor us (evil laugh follows).
The problem with the foam is that Nasa loves to leave the shuttle outside for days with an unstable foam (suspectable from sun hardening/creating cracks, soaking up moisture from the atmosphere which then freezes, widening the cracks). The temperature difference between outside and inside of the foam can reach about 100Kelvin. If they would shield it from the sun, do not drive it out to early and keep it nicely aircoed and conditioned, the foam will probably stay better. If really good aircoed, or with more accurate launch windows, the foam might not bee needed at all.
Adding a protective net around the just described properties of the foam, will makes you run the risk that the foam will really behave bad. The foam could instead of fail in pieces fail as a whole, causing this ultra strong net to fly around in un unpredictable way. Adding the net not around the foam but instead around the shuttle will take care that shuttle arrives in one piece in space. The material however is not heat proof. It will fail under high temperature, actually the outside of the space shuttle is a "controlled" failure, in which after several flights certain parts are replaced. If your net fails on the way back, the shuttle can still loose the vital tiles and not land in one part.
Your idea is not a bad one, and does not need a superhightech foam perse. Just a flexible PE layer could do the trick. The tank will never gets really hot (it is dumped before that happens, and then burns itself on the way down, nobody cares about that part of the trip). Maybe adding a second wiring in the foam itself with some fiber will help too, it will be more complex though.
Last but not least: this problem is a problem invented by Nasa. The foam would not or be less necessary if Nasa used a different fuel (kerosine like the Russians), or would keep the shuttle in a lower surrounding temperature condition.
But with patents Americans will get the profits of it, thus closing a small part of the trade deficit.
Sometimes slogans about innovation and creativity do work out, however in the long run, the outsourcing campaign will need a new slogan.
It is opensource which matters here. A lot of quality projects without any funding will not be able to use the name linux anywmore this way since they just do not have $5000, or do not want to pay that.
Also $5000 does not garantee that their is a quality product. If you want to make sure that the Linux name is only connected to quality products, you do not reach that by asking money. THen you only garantee that some company gives you money. You will have to do a quality assurance program over the software to know if it then qualifies for your $5000 label. For a bit more extensive product this is not possible for only AU$5000. (Spent 100 hours on quality survey and you really start loosing money).
Mentioning what your product runs on or contains is not illegal either. In case of Linux, it is under the GPL, so if I do not tell what is in there, I am violating the GPL, if I tell what is in the product, I am violating the trademark.
Besides all that, having a trademark on a commonly used word is also pretty useless, as Microsoft found out the hard way in several countries: MS Windows (R) can be trademarked, but Windows could not since it is a too general word. Several countries even have laws about this kind of actions, and producers have to take care that their productname does not become a synonym for the group of products.
Ok, I do not get it clearly. I was clearly not being nice to the moderators in my previous post (I was sort of asking for troll), but apparently your message is still considerd flamebait & troll + some insightful, and mine as insightful when it really was total c**p.
Game maker: We make sequals too, we have a special company for that called "EA games" with a motto "challenge everything" which was originally in the brainstorm session "sequal everything". So if you want a sequal to your movie in game style, I am you man.
If you are running MS windows, is it then really your computer? Look good at the licensing, it might reveal some things in the really small print......
Ok, you got moderated as a troll, this should really score good!
I run eGroupware (and before that phpGroupware) for a long time now, and the webfunctionality is really good. People just have to let go of their mandatory outlook integration. It is not that outlook adds anything special (Used outlook in office situations, but also used lotus (I liked lotus more, very nice things possible in there), so I have some experience). Most extra functionality goes wasted on the users anyway, who just manage to use their mail and agenda.
Tools like eGroupware/phpgroupware deliver the standard suite, and are synchronizable with outlook (never seen it work, I do not have MS windows nor the time to see if it is true), which is actually not needed anymore than either. No distribution of software needed at all, and if wanted globally available.
Slashdot Mirror
If they really do those things, $18mln will turn out to be pretty cheap. Well, it is not manufacturing time yet where they can recoupe all losses (-:
All donuts turn out to be defective is shown by extensive research. The random sample taken (500) in several countries, have shown that all donuts have a hole in the middle.
Since the problem is so widespread and since there does not seem to be a regulatory body concerning the properties of a donut, congressional inquiries can almost not be avoided.
In other news: Martha Stewart proposes American Donut Standard Association
Adjust an excisting MS/Linux/other PDA with the software required to enter the secure network, and rewrite some drivers to bring the software up to date with . the emerging (BUDGETOVERFLOW DETECTED) secure communications standards.
The only hardware change seems to be the Defense access card integration.
Somehow it feels like this device is going to cause a lot of embarrasment later when one gets in the wrong hands and breaks all the security at once.
After all it is a dirty hack
It is a nice thing the bar, I like widgets (Konfabulator or native in Tiger) from OS-X with all their possibilities better though than a single bar.
The name is hopefully for Sun in this project not the end result.
Score 5: Well, I do not do my own moderation
Anyway: As you point out yourself too luckily: It is the design (irregular shape etc) which increases temperature problems and with that ice formation.
With LOX/LH2 rockets there is a very simple solution in use against ice: Just launch the rocket, the ice falls of at launch, and since there is almost nothing it can fatally hit on the way down, or which will be used again, it is not an issue.
Ablative properties: Sorry, I was thinking the wrong way around in the release order of the tank and the thrusters. The tank is long enough in flight to cause serious aerodynamic heat problems + sufficient heating from the engines & thrusters.
Last: I do not see the difference in driving a shuttle for several miles, or some walls for the same distance, heck the walls are cheaper and most likely lighter (per piece), so there is less risk in moving those around instead of the shuttle. Plus you can do all the preflight checks in a better protected environment.
MD5 is a hashing method, and ofcourse you can look up the hashes again. It is just a quick and dirty way of encoding your passwords in php, or to check if a file is really that file which you were expecting. It is not for real password encryption use.
Anyway: MD5 hashes over a certain dataset are not unique. Two datasets can result in the same MD5 hash, assuming a fixed has length. This database could point those out too.
As last remark: This kind of database use has been done before by chess engines. By just storing most succesful board setups, the next moves could be executed more effectively and a lot faster.
So that is why one of the suggestions is to change the situation in which the shuttle stays prelaunch. In other words: change the staging area into the physical path. So instead of moving the shuttle around in a complex way, move the walls away in another complext way.
My thought too. But when commercial companies use it for promotion and to cut their costs, I think that the leeches will win.
What if someone else runs the data through stego to see if something is hidden. That way anybody can find the hidden data.
Ok, you can password protect it, but how good is stego in that? If gets really interesting to see if that is hackable.
Ok, you are right, in the new world order, must is maybe a bit to strong. I will replace that with: If you have a homemade movie, you should be allowed to pay a "DRM play you own movie license (unlimitted available for extra fee)" after a committee checks your movie license.
This is not a troll! That is how it works.
Insensitive moderator!
If you have a homemade movie you must be able to play that. So it looks to me that a monitor with DRM is pretty much not doing anything to stop you from watching your ripped movie which has the same parameters as your homemade movie. The screendrivers do not need to be hacked for that.
The DRM probably has use in companies like for protecting documents, but I can not imagine how yet, and why that should happen at monitor level. Maybe a document can be sent around and you can open it but not display it? Pretty useless, lets not be able to open it than anyway, much more efficient.
I think they just added this DRM line for the sake of hollywood. VESA headoffice: If we add DRM to our statement of better resolutions, and bandwidth for this new standard, then we might get less opposition from Hollywood who is afraid of copies, or they might even sponsor us (evil laugh follows).
The problem with the foam is that Nasa loves to leave the shuttle outside for days with an unstable foam (suspectable from sun hardening/creating cracks, soaking up moisture from the atmosphere which then freezes, widening the cracks). The temperature difference between outside and inside of the foam can reach about 100Kelvin. If they would shield it from the sun, do not drive it out to early and keep it nicely aircoed and conditioned, the foam will probably stay better. If really good aircoed, or with more accurate launch windows, the foam might not bee needed at all.
Adding a protective net around the just described properties of the foam, will makes you run the risk that the foam will really behave bad. The foam could instead of fail in pieces fail as a whole, causing this ultra strong net to fly around in un unpredictable way.
Adding the net not around the foam but instead around the shuttle will take care that shuttle arrives in one piece in space. The material however is not heat proof. It will fail under high temperature, actually the outside of the space shuttle is a "controlled" failure, in which after several flights certain parts are replaced. If your net fails on the way back, the shuttle can still loose the vital tiles and not land in one part.
Your idea is not a bad one, and does not need a superhightech foam perse. Just a flexible PE layer could do the trick. The tank will never gets really hot (it is dumped before that happens, and then burns itself on the way down, nobody cares about that part of the trip). Maybe adding a second wiring in the foam itself with some fiber will help too, it will be more complex though.
Last but not least: this problem is a problem invented by Nasa. The foam would not or be less necessary if Nasa used a different fuel (kerosine like the Russians), or would keep the shuttle in a lower surrounding temperature condition.
Reading the article? Hum, that would be a concept. I thought this was just a place to put unrelated comments.
But with patents Americans will get the profits of it, thus closing a small part of the trade deficit.
Sometimes slogans about innovation and creativity do work out, however in the long run, the outsourcing campaign will need a new slogan.
Nanotube condoms are for really small penisses.
It is opensource which matters here. A lot of quality projects without any funding will not be able to use the name linux anywmore this way since they just do not have $5000, or do not want to pay that.
Also $5000 does not garantee that their is a quality product. If you want to make sure that the Linux name is only connected to quality products, you do not reach that by asking money. THen you only garantee that some company gives you money. You will have to do a quality assurance program over the software to know if it then qualifies for your $5000 label. For a bit more extensive product this is not possible for only AU$5000. (Spent 100 hours on quality survey and you really start loosing money).
Mentioning what your product runs on or contains is not illegal either. In case of Linux, it is under the GPL, so if I do not tell what is in there, I am violating the GPL, if I tell what is in the product, I am violating the trademark.
Besides all that, having a trademark on a commonly used word is also pretty useless, as Microsoft found out the hard way in several countries: MS Windows (R) can be trademarked, but Windows could not since it is a too general word. Several countries even have laws about this kind of actions, and producers have to take care that their productname does not become a synonym for the group of products.
Ok, I do not get it clearly. I was clearly not being nice to the moderators in my previous post (I was sort of asking for troll), but apparently your message is still considerd flamebait & troll + some insightful, and mine as insightful when it really was total c**p.
Game maker: We make sequals too, we have a special company for that called "EA games" with a motto "challenge everything" which was originally in the brainstorm session "sequal everything". So if you want a sequal to your movie in game style, I am you man.
If you are running MS windows, is it then really your computer? Look good at the licensing, it might reveal some things in the really small print......
Ok, you got moderated as a troll, this should really score good!
I run eGroupware (and before that phpGroupware) for a long time now, and the webfunctionality is really good. People just have to let go of their mandatory outlook integration. It is not that outlook adds anything special (Used outlook in office situations, but also used lotus (I liked lotus more, very nice things possible in there), so I have some experience).
Most extra functionality goes wasted on the users anyway, who just manage to use their mail and agenda.
The discovery of Y-shaped nanotubes made water searchers more convinced that using an Y-shaped branch from a tree is the best approach possible.
Tools like eGroupware/phpgroupware deliver the standard suite, and are synchronizable with outlook (never seen it work, I do not have MS windows nor the time to see if it is true), which is actually not needed anymore than either. No distribution of software needed at all, and if wanted globally available.