While previous rendezvous
and docking efforts have been piloted by astronauts, the
unmanned DART spacecraft will have computers and
sensors to perform all of its rendezvous functions.
Future applications of technologies developed by the
DART project will benet the nation in future space systems
development requiring in-space assembly, services, or
other autonomous rendezvous operations.
You're right. I probably should have put uneducated in quotes. (a bunch of "uneducated" 19-year olds....). But the whole point of the topic was that people who have what most would consider "lower class" jobs can do exceptional work. ("lower class", as in bus driver rather than teacher, enlisted rather than officer, etc.)
These young men are not what most would call their ideal employees. Young, no college education, etc, but there isn't any other group I'd want running my flight deck. That was what I was trying to get at.
I was speaking with a Navy Lt this afternoon, and one of his comments is along this line:
He was on a carrier, and there was a trash fire. Someone tossed a cig in the garbage, or soemthing, and a trash bag ended up starting a little blaze. It was nothing spectacular, until you realized that it was moving towards a container full of jet fuel. As he put it, that much jet fuel would "crack the ship in half". If you take a minute to think about how BIG a 90,000 TON aircraft carrier is, you'll realize that it would be a BIG explosion. And what happened? The people working on the flight deck, a bunch of un-educated 19 year old enlisted guys, ran TOWARDS the inferno, and put the fire out before it lit off the jet fuel. These guys may have been at the bottom of the totem pole, but when they pulled into port... guys who had $160,000 educations were buying these 19-year olds drinks.
There are some shitty jobs out there, but some absolutely amazing people do damn good work at some of them. And the intellegent people out there respect them for it.
I think it would be better put that we cannot evolve anymore. That's the whole point of civilization. As soon as people start working together, evoltion stops. The weak (like the handicapped people we're building implants for) are protected/supported by the strong (those of us with working bodies.)
It works intellectually as well as physically, ie the smart raise up the stupid. We don't all have to discover our own vaccines....
I personally see genetics as influencing our minds and bodies more than cybernetics (it seems easier to tweak genes to get rid of birth-defects than to rebuild bodies after they are born wrong), but the idea of, say a pilot's brain connected directly to a plane does have interesting implications...
References to Chinese being bogey-men are moderatly unwelcome too. We've heard it before, and unless you can actually dig up some references to the specific guy, you're just sprouting prejudiced grap! We aren't close-minded racists are we? right?
From the article: Zhao, a former government official in China's Ministry of Posts and Telecommunications.
I don't know a lot about Chinese governing bodies, but I'm going to guess that the "Ministry of Posts and Telecommunications" is probably the body that restricts which URLs the Chinese can visit. Yes this happens. Yes I have spoken to people who have surfed the net in China. The Chinese are not bogey-men, but I don't want anyone who has ever been in the PRC government running anything I care about.
The thing about robotic snakes is that they can get anywhere a real snake can. My professor's snake-bots can climb straight up a drainpipe, tube, or crack. The caterpillar one only managed a 22 degree angle. Doesn't make "real" snakebots more useful in general, but speed isn't everything, and CMU's snake-bots can really get around...
undercutting the ability of networks to deliver quality programming.
I'm don't really think that there was ever really "quality programming" on a large scale... About the only tv I have watched after the age of 12 was the Simpsons. Those in the tv industry are used to being grossly overpaid. Now that providers are lossing revinue from ads actors pay checks may actually come closer to relecting their worth.
Incedently, I think that the line between the tv and the computer is going to be blurring in the next few decades. As internet speeds increase it becomes easier and easier to download and view longer and longer movies. There could actually be a pay-per-view system of "Click here to watch xyz for 75cents" or websites that show programs that are just jammed full of pop ups or something.
A while ago I saw an article on housing for disaster relief. Someone figured out that about the only thing all disaster areas have in common is some kind of soil.
The solution was to use it. They came up with a method of building decent houses with almost nothing other than dirt. Take a large tubular piece of material. (think a really long sock) and fill it with dirt. Take your sock o' dirt and build a kind of beehive looking structure. (lay it out in a cirlce 10-15 ft in diameter, and then add layers on top of that foundation that slowly get smaller and smaller.)
It is litterally dirt cheap, and if you reinforce it with some barbed wire you have a building that's really tough. (they built a few tests in California and they've dealt with a few earthquakes just fine....)
not as quick / easy, but cheaper, and much easier to mass produce (where will we fine barbed wire and cloth....)
Does the President have to be ex-Military? The whole Commander-in-Chief thing makes the President "CEO" of the Army, Navy/Marine Corps, and Air Force.
Many of our leaders have been in the military, but I don't think of it as a requirement. The requirement is that the President listens to his military advisors. Civilian oversight of the American Military has been in place since the very beginning, and as Bill Murray put it "we've been kicken' ass for 200 years. We're ten and one!"
It's best if and executive know what his organization does, but that knowledge can be cursory if he's smart enough to listen.
The Titanic is going down -- we had better stop re-arranging the deck chairs and start building a new boat.
How about the new boat has a little failure time built in? What I mean is this. Design a high school track that can be completed by a bright student in 2.5 or 3 years, but expect students to repeat classes. Give students tests on not only what they learned in the previous semester, but on EVERYTHING. That math class from two years back, the World history stuff from freshman year, etc. If they fail the test, they take the course again.
Put the pressure on the student. "I had a bad teacher" is not really an excuse. If you want to learn a subject, you'll learn it anyway. Teach the students that hard work will get them out of high school, and being lazy will get them stuck there. See if test grades don't imporve.
If the only thing of value is that more lives were saved than lost, then the same argument can be applied to therapies derived from embryonic stem cells.
If more lives are saved than lost, what do you care if a few embryos were harvested for this treatment
No one else thinks this is scary? This is foundation upon which some of the most horrifying events of our time we built.
Social Darwinism: If more lives are saved then lost, everything is ok. So if we just round up people how have undesirable traits, genetic faults, dreadful diseases, etc and kill them, the society as a whole benefits, so it's ok. We did evil, but it was a net good, so we're good people...
Naturally, we should take into account the benefits versus the costs, but "the ends justify the means" is a scary statement...
Think of it this way: So Saddam Hussein is a leader that should be taken out of power for the good of his people. Let's pretend that the UN actually stood a chance of taking him out of power through political means (without war.) (I really don' think they did, but let's pretend.)
Then the idea of going to war would clearly be wrong. (it may or may not be wrong as is, but that's a different story.)
So we have ways of obtaining stem cells without harming any children, so the idea of harming children to obtain stem cells should clearly be wrong.
Nothing is ever clearly anything, but I thought I'd put it out there......
Given that there is legitimate concern that we will soon reach -- and maybe already have -- peak oil production, the $80/bbl price may be competitive before too long.
Agreed.
The real problem is that there just aren't enough turkey guts in the world to replace crude oil, and the grain that the turkeys are fed is produced by an agricultural industry that is totally dependent on petroleum-derived fertilizers and pesticides.
Disagree. National Geographic ran an article on the process in 2003. Theoretically, you can use offal (turkey guts, cow parts, etc.) or just about any other natural product. (Tires, human/medical waste, etc.) They said the only thing that the process won't work on is nuclear material, and we already have a realitivly good way to get engery out of that... I don't think we have to worry about raw materials, Americans are great at making trash.
In addition, some of the by-prodcuts of this process can be used in fertilizers.
This certainly will not solve all of our energy problems, but it sounds pretty promising to me. It'll cut down on landfills and on our oil dependence.
In the early 1900s Teddy Roosevelt (and others) set about "trust busting." Laissez faire economics had led to a number of "trusts" (monopolies) forming. Carnegie Steel, and other similar trusts came to dominate industries through vertical and horizontal integration. This means that one group of individuals would either
a) be on the boards of all of the major companies invovled in a certain activity or
b) control one activity from start to finish (meaning from the time that the raw materials are produced to the finished product.)
This created a massivly wealthy upper class with considerable power. Pure capitalism breeds monoplies like none other. That's why the government tries to regulate business
/history lesson
Note: Capitialism is still much more effective than communism, socialism, etc. but "a true capitalistic system" doesn't really work either.
I suspect the US Government has the greatest number and probably the highest percentage of unmotivated, uninterested employees of any organization I have encountered.
There are 1.4 million Americans who would disagree. The members of our military may be frustrated, angry or scared but they are definately NOT unmotivated or uninterested. They signed up to protect us and their lives are on the line. "unmotivated,[and] uninterested" they are not.
That individual is fined (lose of personal property)
This is based on my "personal morality" how? It sounds like a law issue to me... Just because you're scum and I call you on it doesn't mean I'm 50 years behind.
I doubt they were under trained or out of shape, more caught off guard. The article says "the patrol car" not "a patrol car." My guess is that these three cops were taking the suspect out of the car at the station, and then he went after them.
First off, when you're on your home turf, you aren't quite as attentive as you would be in on the beat.
Second, the sound of a gun going off is the sort of that that startles people. If the other two cops weren't looking at the kid when he stole the gun / shot the first cop, they probably didn't react as quickly as they needed too. They were too busy going "what the hell was that?"
I'm not saying that it would be easy, or that I'd recomend trying it (shooting police officers is a really good way to get yourself shot) but with a lot of luck and good timing, you could pull that sort of thing off.
All this said, the cops should have been paying more attention the kid.
I think that it's only fair that the cheater pays. You make a promise that you are going to love someone for the rest of your life, if you break that promise, you pay for it, because the other person has invested (time, money, and affection) in you, and you haven't held up your end of the deal.
Would you have a 50/50 split of assets in every divorce? What is she is independently wealthy, and he cheats on her. When they divorce she loses a fortune because he is a pig. THAT wouldn't make sense to me.
Slashdot Mirror
These young men are not what most would call their ideal employees. Young, no college education, etc, but there isn't any other group I'd want running my flight deck. That was what I was trying to get at.
She can expose things like nobody else can
I'll say....
He was on a carrier, and there was a trash fire. Someone tossed a cig in the garbage, or soemthing, and a trash bag ended up starting a little blaze. It was nothing spectacular, until you realized that it was moving towards a container full of jet fuel. As he put it, that much jet fuel would "crack the ship in half". If you take a minute to think about how BIG a 90,000 TON aircraft carrier is, you'll realize that it would be a BIG explosion. And what happened? The people working on the flight deck, a bunch of un-educated 19 year old enlisted guys, ran TOWARDS the inferno, and put the fire out before it lit off the jet fuel. These guys may have been at the bottom of the totem pole, but when they pulled into port... guys who had $160,000 educations were buying these 19-year olds drinks.
There are some shitty jobs out there, but some absolutely amazing people do damn good work at some of them. And the intellegent people out there respect them for it.
I think it would be better put that we cannot evolve anymore. That's the whole point of civilization. As soon as people start working together, evoltion stops. The weak (like the handicapped people we're building implants for) are protected/supported by the strong (those of us with working bodies.)
It works intellectually as well as physically, ie the smart raise up the stupid. We don't all have to discover our own vaccines....
I personally see genetics as influencing our minds and bodies more than cybernetics (it seems easier to tweak genes to get rid of birth-defects than to rebuild bodies after they are born wrong), but the idea of, say a pilot's brain connected directly to a plane does have interesting implications...
only 199 of 960 active developers had voted -- well down on the 315 who had cast ballots at the same stage last year.
Those facist founding fathers, making it illegal to promote the use of violence to overthrow the government...
From the article: Zhao, a former government official in China's Ministry of Posts and Telecommunications.
I don't know a lot about Chinese governing bodies, but I'm going to guess that the "Ministry of Posts and Telecommunications" is probably the body that restricts which URLs the Chinese can visit. Yes this happens. Yes I have spoken to people who have surfed the net in China. The Chinese are not bogey-men, but I don't want anyone who has ever been in the PRC government running anything I care about.
Most astronauts are Air Force...
The thing about robotic snakes is that they can get anywhere a real snake can. My professor's snake-bots can climb straight up a drainpipe, tube, or crack. The caterpillar one only managed a 22 degree angle. Doesn't make "real" snakebots more useful in general, but speed isn't everything, and CMU's snake-bots can really get around...
It sort of works. I pull out the card and my ID, and about half the time they ask to see both.
I'm don't really think that there was ever really "quality programming" on a large scale... About the only tv I have watched after the age of 12 was the Simpsons. Those in the tv industry are used to being grossly overpaid. Now that providers are lossing revinue from ads actors pay checks may actually come closer to relecting their worth.
Incedently, I think that the line between the tv and the computer is going to be blurring in the next few decades. As internet speeds increase it becomes easier and easier to download and view longer and longer movies. There could actually be a pay-per-view system of "Click here to watch xyz for 75cents" or websites that show programs that are just jammed full of pop ups or something.
The solution was to use it. They came up with a method of building decent houses with almost nothing other than dirt. Take a large tubular piece of material. (think a really long sock) and fill it with dirt. Take your sock o' dirt and build a kind of beehive looking structure. (lay it out in a cirlce 10-15 ft in diameter, and then add layers on top of that foundation that slowly get smaller and smaller.)
It is litterally dirt cheap, and if you reinforce it with some barbed wire you have a building that's really tough. (they built a few tests in California and they've dealt with a few earthquakes just fine....)
not as quick / easy, but cheaper, and much easier to mass produce (where will we fine barbed wire and cloth....)
Does the President have to be ex-Military? The whole Commander-in-Chief thing makes the President "CEO" of the Army, Navy/Marine Corps, and Air Force.
Many of our leaders have been in the military, but I don't think of it as a requirement. The requirement is that the President listens to his military advisors. Civilian oversight of the American Military has been in place since the very beginning, and as Bill Murray put it "we've been kicken' ass for 200 years. We're ten and one!"
It's best if and executive know what his organization does, but that knowledge can be cursory if he's smart enough to listen.
How about the new boat has a little failure time built in? What I mean is this. Design a high school track that can be completed by a bright student in 2.5 or 3 years, but expect students to repeat classes. Give students tests on not only what they learned in the previous semester, but on EVERYTHING. That math class from two years back, the World history stuff from freshman year, etc. If they fail the test, they take the course again.
Put the pressure on the student. "I had a bad teacher" is not really an excuse. If you want to learn a subject, you'll learn it anyway. Teach the students that hard work will get them out of high school, and being lazy will get them stuck there. See if test grades don't imporve.
What if the three mile island guy starts cursing, does the fine go up?
No one else thinks this is scary? This is foundation upon which some of the most horrifying events of our time we built.
Social Darwinism: If more lives are saved then lost, everything is ok. So if we just round up people how have undesirable traits, genetic faults, dreadful diseases, etc and kill them, the society as a whole benefits, so it's ok. We did evil, but it was a net good, so we're good people...
Naturally, we should take into account the benefits versus the costs, but "the ends justify the means" is a scary statement...
Think of it this way: So Saddam Hussein is a leader that should be taken out of power for the good of his people. Let's pretend that the UN actually stood a chance of taking him out of power through political means (without war.) (I really don' think they did, but let's pretend.)
Then the idea of going to war would clearly be wrong. (it may or may not be wrong as is, but that's a different story.)
So we have ways of obtaining stem cells without harming any children, so the idea of harming children to obtain stem cells should clearly be wrong.
Nothing is ever clearly anything, but I thought I'd put it out there......
Agreed.
The real problem is that there just aren't enough turkey guts in the world to replace crude oil, and the grain that the turkeys are fed is produced by an agricultural industry that is totally dependent on petroleum-derived fertilizers and pesticides.
Disagree. National Geographic ran an article on the process in 2003. Theoretically, you can use offal (turkey guts, cow parts, etc.) or just about any other natural product. (Tires, human/medical waste, etc.) They said the only thing that the process won't work on is nuclear material, and we already have a realitivly good way to get engery out of that... I don't think we have to worry about raw materials, Americans are great at making trash.
In addition, some of the by-prodcuts of this process can be used in fertilizers.
This certainly will not solve all of our energy problems, but it sounds pretty promising to me. It'll cut down on landfills and on our oil dependence.
Look at: http://www.answers.com/topic/trust-busting The Wikipedia definition is the best.
In the early 1900s Teddy Roosevelt (and others) set about "trust busting." Laissez faire economics had led to a number of "trusts" (monopolies) forming. Carnegie Steel, and other similar trusts came to dominate industries through vertical and horizontal integration. This means that one group of individuals would either
a) be on the boards of all of the major companies invovled in a certain activity or
b) control one activity from start to finish (meaning from the time that the raw materials are produced to the finished product.)
This created a massivly wealthy upper class with considerable power. Pure capitalism breeds monoplies like none other. That's why the government tries to regulate business
Note: Capitialism is still much more effective than communism, socialism, etc. but "a true capitalistic system" doesn't really work either.
If you think that capitialism does not allow monopolies, talk to Microsoft.
What if the monopoly provider decides to disallow all "insensitive content"?
What if the police cars only let red SUVs travel on the middle lanes of the highway?
I'm not saying that broadband should be done the way it is in S.Korea, just that knee jerk reactions bother me.
A nuclear weapon only uses about a grapefruit sized piece of fissionable material.
And only about 8 grams of matter were actually converted to enegery by the original nukes used against Japan.
30 kg missing seems like a big deal to me. I'd like to know for sure whether its an accounting issue or someone else has it.
There are 1.4 million Americans who would disagree. The members of our military may be frustrated, angry or scared but they are definately NOT unmotivated or uninterested. They signed up to protect us and their lives are on the line. "unmotivated,[and] uninterested" they are not.
The Navy ones are pretty tech savvy too...
One individual breaks the agreement (cheats)
That individual is fined (lose of personal property)
This is based on my "personal morality" how? It sounds like a law issue to me... Just because you're scum and I call you on it doesn't mean I'm 50 years behind.
First off, when you're on your home turf, you aren't quite as attentive as you would be in on the beat.
Second, the sound of a gun going off is the sort of that that startles people. If the other two cops weren't looking at the kid when he stole the gun / shot the first cop, they probably didn't react as quickly as they needed too. They were too busy going "what the hell was that?"
I'm not saying that it would be easy, or that I'd recomend trying it (shooting police officers is a really good way to get yourself shot) but with a lot of luck and good timing, you could pull that sort of thing off.
All this said, the cops should have been paying more attention the kid.
Would you have a 50/50 split of assets in every divorce? What is she is independently wealthy, and he cheats on her. When they divorce she loses a fortune because he is a pig. THAT wouldn't make sense to me.