Grandma, or Joe Sixpack, aren't going to change out the OS, or even apply service packs. For that audience, it makes sense to review hardware and software as a single unit.
And they did mention that they could run games on the thing, which means that Lindows was working.
"And, if we attach the M16 to the gun rack in the back of this Cadillac Escalade, the resulting weapons system might cost in excess of $75,000!"
The M4 as typically fielded is maybe a $3,000 weapon (I have no way of knowing what the Army actually pays for it). It is not equipped with the M203 as standard equipment (only one or two riflemen in each squad carry that). It is not equipped with thermal sights as standard equipment. It is never equipped with both thermal and optical sights at the same time.
Bullshit. THe OICW is many times more complex, and includes a shortbarrelled HK G96 that itself would be comparably expensive to the M16.
On the other hand, the army recently put together a totally different development program for a lightweight M4 replacement that will probably be better than the M16, and around the same cost.
Jon Acheson
Yes, Sony is selling them now.
on
YOPY Arrives
·
· Score: 1
Go to Dynamism.com and check out the Sony PCG-U101!
I don't know if I'd say that, but Lucas knows a great deal more about film. Lucas has reinvented modern filmaking twice in his lifetime, fercryingoutloud.
(Note: I'm not saying Lucas is a great director, mind you. Still, as bad as Episode II was, it was about a million times better than Johnny Mnemonic.)
I remember WIRED's interview with George Lucas in the early days of work on Episode 1, and they ran some of the same ideas past him.
"Hey George, is all TV going to be interactive?"
"No." "What do you mean, 'No?'" "I mean no. People don't want interactive TV." "But, but, but..."
And lo and behold, it's 2003, and interactive TV is still dead. The closest we have are video games, and P2P networks for "video on demand."
I see the same thing happening here. As usual, Gibson has interesting ideas about society and technology, but his economics are bunk. Where does the money come from to pay the person that does all the modelling to render The Great Escape as a Playstation 13 game? Nobody wants that.
This is the cyberpunk equivalent of the future with the airships and radiator fins on everything.
Jon Acheson
Re:No, End NASA-controlled Manned Space Flight.
on
Shuttle Politics
·
· Score: 1
"Given the huge amount of private-sector activity in the suborbital market currently,"
Absolutely none. There's a few dozen companies talking about this and that, but that's all it is: Talk. The Chinese have done a heck of a lot more with manned spaceflight than the US private sector has.
Ever heard of the X-Prize? Currently, you have Armadillo, who have sent up several test vehicles, and Scaled Composites, who demoed their vehicle and have flown the first stage, and XCor, who are flying their first test vehicle...
Please update your information.
"and NASA's pitiful track record in developing new launch vehicles,"
Compard to...? Who else uses a launch vehicle capable of making repairs in space?
NASA has not developed a successful new man-rated launch system in the last 35 years, despite billions of dollars spent. Note that I list Shuttle as unsuccessful, because although it flew, it achieved almost none of its primary goals (cheap, safe, frequent space launches with rapid turnaround).
Jon Acheson
Re:And this refutes my point how?
on
Shuttle Politics
·
· Score: 1
But that wasn't your original arguement--your chicken and egging here.
No I'm not. My original argument has always been that 1 in 62.5 IS a bad failure rate. Your response indicated that it would be an unacceptable for airline-like space flight, which tends to back up my point rather than refute it.
I think you're reading more into my response than I meant to put there. I'm not arguing that shuttle operations are like an airline (though they were promised to be), or that the flight envelope of the shuttle is in any way similar to that of an airline. I'm only saying that 1 out of 62.5 is a bad failure rate for anything outside of a disposable missile or a test vehicle.
If there had not been the two shuttle disasters and the shuttle had a perfect record it wouldn't ipso facto lead to more space travel, except insofar as we'd have two more orbiters and less down time from the investigations.
I see your point, but disagree. I do think that without the two shuttle disasters we would be farther along, though we certainly wouldn't be vacationing on the moon. Public confidence in space would be a lot higher, and it would probably be a lot easier for private companies to find investment: it would seem less of a risk.
And, if the lack of disasters had been due to the space shuttle being a better-designed launch system that had somehow achieved its goals of regular, less expensive space travel, we'd be way ahead.
I'm simply saying that you can't draw a specious connection between air traffic and shuttle trips that means anything.
That's true, I can't draw any kind of a specious connection that means anything.:) Fortunately my argument isn't specious.
That's an incredibly specious arguement--if space travel scaled to the point that air travel is at, we would naturally expect the rate of failure to decrease--it would have to, as we wouldn't expand to that point until it had.
Then if the rate of failure remains as high as it currently is with Shuttle, doesn't if follow that space travel cannot scale up?
I want space travel to scale up. Therefore the current rate of failure is NOT ACCEPTABLE.
Try comparing them based on mileage per capita and/or mileage per ton.
In other words, your orginal argument, which was based solely on losses per flight, doesn't hold water. Now you're changing the conditions of your argument and hoping I don't notice.
Also, let's not forget, the environment in which the shuttle functions is far more extreme than any commercial aircraft. You can't compare a regular NY-->London flight with a trip into orbit.
Sure I can, particularly on things like "number of flaming deaths," which is a statistic that is equally relevant to either type of flight. Because if I die, it doesn't matter to me how long the flight was.
Then, just factor in some of the extra capabilities (which, in safety terms, are really liabilities), such as deploying equipment in vacuum.
No, for this argument, those factors are irrelevant. Airliners require extra capabilites over buses and trains, but it is perfectly relevant to see what your chance of dying on a given trip is on a bus vs a plane.
Sure, the shuttle's not perfect. It is certainly not cost effective. But, I would say that it has a rather outstanding safety record.
"only 14 flaming deaths. Buy now!"
Jon Acheson
Re:No, End NASA-controlled Manned Space Flight.
on
Shuttle Politics
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
The big shakeup needs to come in Management and the philosophy. Open space up to more commercialism at a lower price. NASA has the technology to offer Suborbital flights as well as the capability to do orbital flights as well. Get the price down to something that your average BigWig in business will be able to afford, and start making some money to go towards development.
I agree, but NASA is absolutely NOT the right group to do this. NASA is a bureaucracy, an organization that is first and foremost a political organization. As such, it rewards political ability, NOT efficiency, and NOT forming a workable plan.
I mean, how many of its primary design goals did the shuttle meet? Almost none: it wasn't reusable enough, didn't lower launch costs, never flew nearly enough. Tell me, who got fired?
Jon Acheson
Re:What is an acceptable risk?
on
Shuttle Politics
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Let's put this in perspective. If one out of 62.5 airplanes crashed, that would be, what, about two plane crashes per major airport per day?
Yes, this is a real problem.
Jon Acheson
No, End NASA-controlled Manned Space Flight.
on
Shuttle Politics
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
Or, more accurately, NASA-controlled development of manned space flight.
Given the huge amount of private-sector activity in the suborbital market currently, and NASA's pitiful track record in developing new launch vehicles, it's not at all unlikely that simply getting NASA out of the way will yield an economically feasable set of replacement vehicles in a shorter time frame for less money.
The US Commerce Department released an interesting report on private suborbital development. It's a little out of date now (doesn't mention Rutan's SS1, which is now an X-Prize front-runner), but is still an interesting read.
...Which has almost zero security issues, or power issues, will link up with damn near anything, and is a good $100-200 cheaper at the same storage size.
Sony is probably changing over to a different DVD-ROM drive in order to save money (by now they were probably the only ones using the old part), and this is a free feature that comes with the hardware change.
I had read on a couple audio boards that people were using CD recorders to captures live sound. This apparently yielded high enough quality, and had the advantage that you got a CD out of it.
It doesn't look like an iPod, and Apple wasn't remotely the first to put out an audio player with a hard drive. Plus, this thing can apparently record from audio in, which might be very cool for some applications if the quality is there.
In my experience, the only time I ever send or receive hardcopy is when I am dealing with a full-service printer and getting a manual run off. Then I receive proof copies of the manual until I approve them, and they send us thousands of copies in boxes. Even then I typically FTP the files to them.
Often contracts have to be faxed, and every once in a while you mail out a CD-ROM.
The only hardcopy I receive is Christmas cards and the occasional invoice.
Osamu Tezuka was the creator of the comic book/cartoon hero Astro Boy (Tetsuwan Otomo in Japan). He had something like 19 different laws, covering things in much more detail. "Robots may not build robots" was one issue Asimov missed.
There is a list of all 19 laws in the first volume of the Enlgush language reprints of the Astro Boy manga. I haven't had any luck googling for them, unfortunately.
Slashdot Mirror
Grandma, or Joe Sixpack, aren't going to change out the OS, or even apply service packs. For that audience, it makes sense to review hardware and software as a single unit.
And they did mention that they could run games on the thing, which means that Lindows was working.
Jon Acheson
According to your plan, all the information on earth will have to pass through his phone! It'll have to be huge!
Jon Acheson
Lies, damn lies and marketing.
"And, if we attach the M16 to the gun rack in the back of this Cadillac Escalade, the resulting weapons system might cost in excess of $75,000!"
The M4 as typically fielded is maybe a $3,000 weapon (I have no way of knowing what the Army actually pays for it). It is not equipped with the M203 as standard equipment (only one or two riflemen in each squad carry that). It is not equipped with thermal sights as standard equipment. It is never equipped with both thermal and optical sights at the same time.
Jon Acheson
Bullshit. THe OICW is many times more complex, and includes a shortbarrelled HK G96 that itself would be comparably expensive to the M16.
On the other hand, the army recently put together a totally different development program for a lightweight M4 replacement that will probably be better than the M16, and around the same cost.
Jon Acheson
Go to Dynamism.com and check out the Sony PCG-U101!
Jon Acheson
I bought an ASUS V9520TD FX 5200 card last week and it wouldn't even install on Windows 98...:(
Back it goes today!
Jon Acheson
I don't know if I'd say that, but Lucas knows a great deal more about film. Lucas has reinvented modern filmaking twice in his lifetime, fercryingoutloud.
(Note: I'm not saying Lucas is a great director, mind you. Still, as bad as Episode II was, it was about a million times better than Johnny Mnemonic.)
Jon Acheson
And lo and behold, it's 2003, and interactive TV is still dead. The closest we have are video games, and P2P networks for "video on demand."
I see the same thing happening here. As usual, Gibson has interesting ideas about society and technology, but his economics are bunk. Where does the money come from to pay the person that does all the modelling to render The Great Escape as a Playstation 13 game? Nobody wants that.
This is the cyberpunk equivalent of the future with the airships and radiator fins on everything.
Jon Acheson
Ever heard of the X-Prize? Currently, you have Armadillo, who have sent up several test vehicles, and Scaled Composites, who demoed their vehicle and have flown the first stage, and XCor, who are flying their first test vehicle...
Please update your information.
NASA has not developed a successful new man-rated launch system in the last 35 years, despite billions of dollars spent. Note that I list Shuttle as unsuccessful, because although it flew, it achieved almost none of its primary goals (cheap, safe, frequent space launches with rapid turnaround).
Jon Acheson
No I'm not. My original argument has always been that 1 in 62.5 IS a bad failure rate. Your response indicated that it would be an unacceptable for airline-like space flight, which tends to back up my point rather than refute it.
I think you're reading more into my response than I meant to put there. I'm not arguing that shuttle operations are like an airline (though they were promised to be), or that the flight envelope of the shuttle is in any way similar to that of an airline. I'm only saying that 1 out of 62.5 is a bad failure rate for anything outside of a disposable missile or a test vehicle.
I see your point, but disagree. I do think that without the two shuttle disasters we would be farther along, though we certainly wouldn't be vacationing on the moon. Public confidence in space would be a lot higher, and it would probably be a lot easier for private companies to find investment: it would seem less of a risk.
And, if the lack of disasters had been due to the space shuttle being a better-designed launch system that had somehow achieved its goals of regular, less expensive space travel, we'd be way ahead.
That's true, I can't draw any kind of a specious connection that means anything.
Jon Acheson
Then if the rate of failure remains as high as it currently is with Shuttle, doesn't if follow that space travel cannot scale up?
I want space travel to scale up. Therefore the current rate of failure is NOT ACCEPTABLE.
Jon Acheson
In other words, your orginal argument, which was based solely on losses per flight, doesn't hold water. Now you're changing the conditions of your argument and hoping I don't notice.
Sure I can, particularly on things like "number of flaming deaths," which is a statistic that is equally relevant to either type of flight. Because if I die, it doesn't matter to me how long the flight was.
No, for this argument, those factors are irrelevant. Airliners require extra capabilites over buses and trains, but it is perfectly relevant to see what your chance of dying on a given trip is on a bus vs a plane.
"only 14 flaming deaths. Buy now!"
Jon Acheson
I agree, but NASA is absolutely NOT the right group to do this. NASA is a bureaucracy, an organization that is first and foremost a political organization. As such, it rewards political ability, NOT efficiency, and NOT forming a workable plan.
I mean, how many of its primary design goals did the shuttle meet? Almost none: it wasn't reusable enough, didn't lower launch costs, never flew nearly enough. Tell me, who got fired?
Jon Acheson
Let's put this in perspective. If one out of 62.5 airplanes crashed, that would be, what, about two plane crashes per major airport per day?
Yes, this is a real problem.
Jon Acheson
Or, more accurately, NASA-controlled development of manned space flight.
Given the huge amount of private-sector activity in the suborbital market currently, and NASA's pitiful track record in developing new launch vehicles, it's not at all unlikely that simply getting NASA out of the way will yield an economically feasable set of replacement vehicles in a shorter time frame for less money.
Jon Acheson
The US Commerce Department released an interesting report on private suborbital development. It's a little out of date now (doesn't mention Rutan's SS1, which is now an X-Prize front-runner), but is still an interesting read.
Jon Acheson
Yeah. like I really want to watch Short Round and Kate Capshaw again. And I barely remember the third one.
It's like the Alien movies, who wants all of them?
I would be happy to pick up just Raiders, though.
Jon Acheson
...Which has almost zero security issues, or power issues, will link up with damn near anything, and is a good $100-200 cheaper at the same storage size.
Or, for about 25 cents, burn a CD.
Jon Acheson.
It's kind of ironic, but then Gibson has never really been a techie at heart. More of a retro guy, from what I have heard and read.
Jon Acheson
Because if I were an indie store owner I'd be pushing Clix like a fiend after being treated like this.
Jon Acheson
Sony is probably changing over to a different DVD-ROM drive in order to save money (by now they were probably the only ones using the old part), and this is a free feature that comes with the hardware change.
Jon Acheson
I had read on a couple audio boards that people were using CD recorders to captures live sound. This apparently yielded high enough quality, and had the advantage that you got a CD out of it.
Is anyone out there using this?
Jon Acheson
It doesn't look like an iPod, and Apple wasn't remotely the first to put out an audio player with a hard drive. Plus, this thing can apparently record from audio in, which might be very cool for some applications if the quality is there.
Jon Acheson
Where do you work?
In my experience, the only time I ever send or receive hardcopy is when I am dealing with a full-service printer and getting a manual run off. Then I receive proof copies of the manual until I approve them, and they send us thousands of copies in boxes. Even then I typically FTP the files to them.
Often contracts have to be faxed, and every once in a while you mail out a CD-ROM.
The only hardcopy I receive is Christmas cards and the occasional invoice.
Jon Acheson
Osamu Tezuka was the creator of the comic book/cartoon hero Astro Boy (Tetsuwan Otomo in Japan). He had something like 19 different laws, covering things in much more detail. "Robots may not build robots" was one issue Asimov missed.
There is a list of all 19 laws in the first volume of the Enlgush language reprints of the Astro Boy manga. I haven't had any luck googling for them, unfortunately.
Jon Acheson