I believe even the photographers are switching to digital en masse since that way they can publish there images faster (demand driven by magazines, newspapers adn customers alike: A full blown lab for high quality photoprinting is too expensive, so if you want to publish fast on non standard or larger sizes, digital is better, a printer is a lot cheaper than a photography lab). The new digital camera's also have high enough resolution to do this (Expensive, not for sale at dixons). The photographers are even leading the market in demand for higher quality camera's. The people who talk about SLR here are mainly talking about SLR which takes 35mm film, which is not great in granularity to make real high quality photo's with anyway.
The real high quality camera's which take larger size films for larger or much higher quality photo's will most likely stick around, but then again who pays ~$25000 for a camera which can do that?
Why not do the following: Several of us have access to sufficient infrastructure (own/lease with diskspace to spare, plus a bandwidth surplus). Why do we not combine that in a distributed search environment with mirrored nodes with this technique of IBM. The addition of the distributed technology to spider and index the web will be a significant challenge, but the concept is I think pretty appealing. I for one will be willing to "donate" the necessary domain and starting facilities.
Anyone who is interested, you know how to find me.
Also linux (&BSD) boxes are way more at the forefront of operations, while most unixes are far away in datacenters behind firewalls if they are even in a public available part of the internet.
I do not say disabling, but the American goverment has to keep up appearances nowadays more than in the past. The dropping of the A-bomb on Hiroshima, or the bombing of Dresden with firebombs, was not a big deal in 1945. In the 1950s/60s it already became a big deal just to whipe out a complete city, and just to kill everybody. Nowadays the shooting of a innocent civilian can get a soldier into a war tribunal where he will have to answer for his supposed crime (I think that is ridiculous, but it can be necessary).
By disaabling satellites the number of victims will increase on both sites, more innocent bystanders will be killed, and the effectivity of the US army in a non-nuclear war will be reduced, maybe even to the point where they loose. Not because they are not strong enough, do not have the correct weapons for the situation, but just because of the fact that moms & dads will march to the capitol and demand an end to the war. That worked in the past, and it will work again. It is the democratic system in action, and if the president and its party want to have any chance to win the next election, they will have to give in to such a demand.
Just remember that the wars the US fights are clearly not on their own ground, the US is not under attack, has not been under attack by another country since the 2nd world war, and is not likely to be attacked by another country. All the wars they have fought since that time had to be ended just because of political pressure in the US, and have not yielded any positive effect anywhere, not to be said counterproductive effects.
Quote from the article:
MK: Weaponizing space would be very unwise. No satellite has been the subject of a direct physical attack in the history of warfare. Whatever we do sets a precedent that others will follow. We depend so heavily on satellites to protect lives and wage war with a minimum of collateral damage. Attacks on satellites would mean that wars become a whole lot more difficult for our forces in the field and a lot more harmful to noncombatants.
So in short, you can reduce the efficiency of the US army by taking out their satellites. Since other countries are denied access to space, this would be a good tactic for such a country. They will be more dependent and more trained in a war without satellite information, and will be enabled by such a move to get the upperhand in a conflict.
I think the US better invest in protecting their own satellites since they are the softpoint.
PS Disabling satellites by large lasers might work since you could fry just a few components like a photo optic chip, the rest of the satellite is packed in a heat blanket to reflect sunlight and thus a laser will just reflect of that too (at least most of it, rendering it pretty useless, if the atmosphere didn't do that yet)
Err, going to the printing service to print like 2 pages a month is pretty useless. It takes you at ~ an hour to go there and back, and they charge you several inktjet printers a year for that. Just have a inktjet printer sit on your desk is a lot more convenient and cheaper. And if you already print so little, just try to cut back even more, and the whole dilemma will be over.
I thought companies want a global market and are pressing the G7/8 (depends on how you count) to help them in that. But when the market acts back in a global way by protesting against region codings, delayed movie releases (thus watching the copies from the internet), the same companies protest by using their legal means and shear size.
In short: Sony, stop acting like a little kid, just be global, dump region codings, dump price strategies and just sell you products for a fair price all over the globe.
And ofcourse, TV images of a shuttle in the clouds, do not work good. NASA has to show the shuttle landing without the clouds so people can see it works OK again.
And now for the sarcasm version:
And ofcourse, TV images of a shuttle exploding in or above the clouds are totally useless. The networks need a clear view of the sky to be able to get the topratings which only a disaster can give them.
A bit of not perfect weather and the shuttle can not launch or touch down, nothing new here. Ofcourse they are more nervous, if they have a disaster, it will be the shuttles last flight, and with no new crew launch vehicle ready, the chance that NASA will loose a big part of its funding is very realistic, because why would they need so much money if they can not bring people and equipment to the spacestation anyway (That is the political question, not mine!!).
It will rid us of the last hurdle to just give up our legs and kill a certain scholarship system which promotes sports as an alternative to learning.
Finally being a couch potato will be the ultimate norm. Scream to your kids: Put the robots outside and do not temper with their accuracy this time, it already cost us a window this week!
That will become really fun if it suddenly learns to throw the ball back at you at the same speed, just when you switched from a soft ball to a baseball (-:
A new hollywood movie is almost classified as failed if they don't do this ~$20mln in the first weekend, so I would say no to your question/suggestion.
A mix of science, humor and destruction would do it better I think. I am thinking of "Myth Busters" combined with "Junk Yard Wars". A sure watch for both the science interested audience and for people who just want to see destruction and explosions.
BTW: Hasn't this penquin been followed several times by now? So to be honest, it must be a good documentary to be worth to watch it in the movietheater instead of at home.
THe increasing bandwidth makes Ajax like applications for speeding up the user experience pretty unnecessary. It will be used for adding possibilities to have distribution free programs (no install means no questions asked, no 1001 configurations to support), but for speeding up it is pretty useless.
No, but we copied the Californian model overhere in Europe, and it really works out good! From a good distributing grid network buffer we are now on the edge of outages since companies do not like to invest in buffers (buffers are overcapacity and therefore expensive).
As it might be clear to the average US citizen by now, is that monopolies are detested by the US goverment. They do everything in their power to break foreign monopolies to give US companies a fair chance in the big bad foreign world.
What is also clear by now is that for inside the US there are different rules. Good luck! I live in a foreign country and the weirdest things happen under the name of free market (like jeopardizing the electricity network), but everything gets more expensive because of this. You (US citizen) however are in the lucky situation that things happen in reverse, and everything will get more expensive.
That is why big stations do market research so that they can target their broadcasts and podcasts to the consumer. A successfull podcaster will have to address the same group (compete) or a group which is now not addressed since it is commercially not attractive. To compete is tough, you have to fight big money, so yes, the big ones win again with this.
Slashdot Mirror
Eww, my chip has some greenish fungus on it.
Grep microscope (really strong one)
O no, no worry, it is some nanowiring expension set.
I believe even the photographers are switching to digital en masse since that way they can publish there images faster (demand driven by magazines, newspapers adn customers alike: A full blown lab for high quality photoprinting is too expensive, so if you want to publish fast on non standard or larger sizes, digital is better, a printer is a lot cheaper than a photography lab). The new digital camera's also have high enough resolution to do this (Expensive, not for sale at dixons). The photographers are even leading the market in demand for higher quality camera's. The people who talk about SLR here are mainly talking about SLR which takes 35mm film, which is not great in granularity to make real high quality photo's with anyway.
The real high quality camera's which take larger size films for larger or much higher quality photo's will most likely stick around, but then again who pays ~$25000 for a camera which can do that?
Good battery live, sturdy (like concrete crash proof), a phonebook, sms & missed calls. I do not care about the rest either.
Fellow /. viewers,
Why not do the following: Several of us have access to sufficient infrastructure (own/lease with diskspace to spare, plus a bandwidth surplus).
Why do we not combine that in a distributed search environment with mirrored nodes with this technique of IBM. The addition of the distributed technology to spider and index the web will be a significant challenge, but the concept is I think pretty appealing. I for one will be willing to "donate" the necessary domain and starting facilities.
Anyone who is interested, you know how to find me.
There are already thousands of bots and spiders busy on the web. Some really ridiculous ones, so this one more will not really matter.
Also linux (&BSD) boxes are way more at the forefront of operations, while most unixes are far away in datacenters behind firewalls if they are even in a public available part of the internet.
I do not say disabling, but the American goverment has to keep up appearances nowadays more than in the past. The dropping of the A-bomb on Hiroshima, or the bombing of Dresden with firebombs, was not a big deal in 1945. In the 1950s/60s it already became a big deal just to whipe out a complete city, and just to kill everybody. Nowadays the shooting of a innocent civilian can get a soldier into a war tribunal where he will have to answer for his supposed crime (I think that is ridiculous, but it can be necessary).
By disaabling satellites the number of victims will increase on both sites, more innocent bystanders will be killed, and the effectivity of the US army in a non-nuclear war will be reduced, maybe even to the point where they loose. Not because they are not strong enough, do not have the correct weapons for the situation, but just because of the fact that moms & dads will march to the capitol and demand an end to the war. That worked in the past, and it will work again. It is the democratic system in action, and if the president and its party want to have any chance to win the next election, they will have to give in to such a demand.
Just remember that the wars the US fights are clearly not on their own ground, the US is not under attack, has not been under attack by another country since the 2nd world war, and is not likely to be attacked by another country. All the wars they have fought since that time had to be ended just because of political pressure in the US, and have not yielded any positive effect anywhere, not to be said counterproductive effects.
Quote from the article:
MK: Weaponizing space would be very unwise. No satellite has been the subject of a direct physical attack in the history of warfare. Whatever we do sets a precedent that others will follow. We depend so heavily on satellites to protect lives and wage war with a minimum of collateral damage. Attacks on satellites would mean that wars become a whole lot more difficult for our forces in the field and a lot more harmful to noncombatants.
So in short, you can reduce the efficiency of the US army by taking out their satellites. Since other countries are denied access to space, this would be a good tactic for such a country. They will be more dependent and more trained in a war without satellite information, and will be enabled by such a move to get the upperhand in a conflict.
I think the US better invest in protecting their own satellites since they are the softpoint.
PS Disabling satellites by large lasers might work since you could fry just a few components like a photo optic chip, the rest of the satellite is packed in a heat blanket to reflect sunlight and thus a laser will just reflect of that too (at least most of it, rendering it pretty useless, if the atmosphere didn't do that yet)
Give them the space shuttle (-: Pretty efficient (-:
You have to get it into space... Pretty tough for the Americans (-:
Err, going to the printing service to print like 2 pages a month is pretty useless. It takes you at ~ an hour to go there and back, and they charge you several inktjet printers a year for that. Just have a inktjet printer sit on your desk is a lot more convenient and cheaper. And if you already print so little, just try to cut back even more, and the whole dilemma will be over.
I thought companies want a global market and are pressing the G7/8 (depends on how you count) to help them in that. But when the market acts back in a global way by protesting against region codings, delayed movie releases (thus watching the copies from the internet), the same companies protest by using their legal means and shear size.
In short: Sony, stop acting like a little kid, just be global, dump region codings, dump price strategies and just sell you products for a fair price all over the globe.
And ofcourse, TV images of a shuttle in the clouds, do not work good. NASA has to show the shuttle landing without the clouds so people can see it works OK again.
And now for the sarcasm version:
And ofcourse, TV images of a shuttle exploding in or above the clouds are totally useless. The networks need a clear view of the sky to be able to get the topratings which only a disaster can give them.
A bit of not perfect weather and the shuttle can not launch or touch down, nothing new here.
/ 08/0411205&tid=216&tid=126 which can catch an object the size of the space shuttle. They already have the speed about right (shuttle lands with about 270MPH(??))
Ofcourse they are more nervous, if they have a disaster, it will be the shuttles last flight, and with no new crew launch vehicle ready, the chance that NASA will loose a big part of its funding is very realistic, because why would they need so much money if they can not bring people and equipment to the spacestation anyway (That is the political question, not mine!!).
Anyway: We can ask the Japanese to build a huge hand http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/08
It will rid us of the last hurdle to just give up our legs and kill a certain scholarship system which promotes sports as an alternative to learning.
Finally being a couch potato will be the ultimate norm. Scream to your kids: Put the robots outside and do not temper with their accuracy this time, it already cost us a window this week!
That will become really fun if it suddenly learns to throw the ball back at you at the same speed, just when you switched from a soft ball to a baseball (-:
You better be sorry! This is about catching, not throwing the ball!
We surely have to. See the previous post about killer algea, so to survive we have to diversify and spread out.
A new hollywood movie is almost classified as failed if they don't do this ~$20mln in the first weekend, so I would say no to your question/suggestion.
A mix of science, humor and destruction would do it better I think. I am thinking of "Myth Busters" combined with "Junk Yard Wars". A sure watch for both the science interested audience and for people who just want to see destruction and explosions.
BTW: Hasn't this penquin been followed several times by now? So to be honest, it must be a good documentary to be worth to watch it in the movietheater instead of at home.
Yep, pretty much offtopic, but a good read anyway (-:
You're joking, right?
It was meant sarcastic (-:
THe increasing bandwidth makes Ajax like applications for speeding up the user experience pretty unnecessary. It will be used for adding possibilities to have distribution free programs (no install means no questions asked, no 1001 configurations to support), but for speeding up it is pretty useless.
No, but we copied the Californian model overhere in Europe, and it really works out good! From a good distributing grid network buffer we are now on the edge of outages since companies do not like to invest in buffers (buffers are overcapacity and therefore expensive).
As it might be clear to the average US citizen by now, is that monopolies are detested by the US goverment. They do everything in their power to break foreign monopolies to give US companies a fair chance in the big bad foreign world.
What is also clear by now is that for inside the US there are different rules. Good luck! I live in a foreign country and the weirdest things happen under the name of free market (like jeopardizing the electricity network), but everything gets more expensive because of this. You (US citizen) however are in the lucky situation that things happen in reverse, and everything will get more expensive.
That is why big stations do market research so that they can target their broadcasts and podcasts to the consumer. A successfull podcaster will have to address the same group (compete) or a group which is now not addressed since it is commercially not attractive. To compete is tough, you have to fight big money, so yes, the big ones win again with this.