Oh, and that reminds me of the nicest feature of OS X: That pop-ups can't take the focus away from you. I hate hitting spacebar, thinking I'm typing into Notepad, and actually I've agreed to a window that flashed up on my screen for about a half a second and I'm wondering if I just bought viagra.
Except here in Windowsland the spacebar doesn't consent to a popup, you need a enter key or a mouse click. Not to mention you can change this setting using power tools (or a simple RegEdit.
(And to be honest with you I can't remember the last time I had a Viagara popup... I use Windows 60+ hours a week. The most important part of the security system for your computer lies between the computer and the chair, perhaps yours is in need of an upgrade if this is an issue)
Right, but for most of what the moon is good for, we aren't shipping it back to earth. We are shipping to mars or high orbits - avoiding debris. And if we are shipping we have a ton of rock available for the taking to pad our shipment with. Remember, the Russians send up 4 unmanned launches a year, and 2+ manned ones, without incident due to debris. We've only had 1 shuttle incident due to debris, and it was a non-incident. There was a crack in the shuttle's glass pane due to space debris, but it didn't penetrate far enough to be a concern.
Certainly, some types of space salvage (derelict rockets, satellite fragments, etc.) will have a higher value than others (paint flecks, rocket slag, etc.), but even the lowliest dist speck will have value, for the simple reason that it is there.
I understand the argument from the standpont that it cost money to put the salvage into orbit. However "collecting" may wind up costing you more than the fragment itself weighs. Consider: Even if you make it up to LEO for free, you have to get to the item and match your position and velocity in the direction the space salvage is traveling to a degree where you (or your robot, whatever) can grab it. Of course you have to abide by the ideal rocket equation http://exploration.grc.nasa.gov/education/rocket/r ktpow.html. Great. You got your first piece. Now you have to change heading and velocity to intercept piece #2. These vectors aren't all heading in the same direction at the same location. And they are only tracking about 13,000 pieces in NEO... that's not very many pieces given the vast area of space there is! Consider 13,000 random objects on the surface of the earth, now extend it upwards a hundred meters, and add a volume of 1000m in the vertical direction. Long story short, you can't turn a profit given the fact that you need fuel to power the robot to collect this stuff. And given the fact that commercial ventures are starting to break the price point barrier - check out spaceX - 10k a kg will drop an order of magnitude in the next 10 years, easy.
Hope they get it solved before the put the Howard Johnson hotel up there
First off, the guy making the space Hotel is Robert Bigelow so it'll be a Budget Suites of America. Secondly the vast majority of spacecraft are lauched from west to east to make use of the earths rotational velocity (roughly 400m/s at the equator). So most of those objects are moving - you guessed it - west to east. As is the space station, the shuttle, etc. If they are all moving in the same direction collision speeds aren't that high. Now there are a few rogue satellites that were lauched the other way for a variety of reasons so yes there are small amounts of space junk moving counter to the flow.
The other thing to keep in mind: 13,000 pieces of junk spread across a sphere bigger than the earth. LEO is 100-300km up, but GEO is 35,000km up. That's a huge hollowed out sphere of area for 13,000 pieces of "space junk", most of which is flowing in the same direction. And the stuff in LEO deorbits pretty quick because of the rarified atmosphere (the same reason we have to boost the space station 1-2 times a year.) While there is a minor threat, it is just that - a minor one.
The most important component for virus protection is the one sitting between the chair and the keyboard.
Seconded. An idiot will have as many problems with Linux - even a Mac as he will with Windows (I have seen this firsthand, both the mac and linux case). A little education goes a long way.
Yeah, the hardware looks pretty, but for those of us who are in the engineering and science fields who have needs that can't be met by osx - yea, we won't be buying Macs anytime soon. Gotta wonder how carefully Apple wrote those agreements with the hardware vendors...
Or Apple just had a preference? Is there anything wrong with that? Can a company just decide hey, we like Intel chips? I mean look at Yonah. Its a pretty bitching mobile chip...
No, it's called undervolting. You build the chip to a somewhat higher standard, and they will run stably at much lower voltages, which drastically decreases power consuption and heat output.
And yet, at that undervolting, it can still kick an AMD chip's ass at a processing task.
I have no doubt, if Apple had chosen to use AMD processors instead, AMD would have gone out of their way to rush an effecient dual-core notebook chip to market as well.
and been late to market... Yonah wasn't made for Apple, Yonah was there, and Apple ordered a bunch...
Between Discovery, TLC and the History Channel there is a lot of good educational content. Between the triumvirate there are more shows that tend to appeal to younger audiences (like miami ink, American Chopper, etc) than there used to be and recently TLC has been jumping on the home improvement bandwagon (which isn't all bad, especially as a homeowner) but there are still a lot of good shows like Modern Marvels, Extreme Engineering, Monster Garage, and then the specials that any given channel will do (Discovery does a lot on modern aircraft and structures, history of course on historical events, etc.) And I only watch about an hour of TV a day...
I do tend to find a lot of bones to pick with Mythbusters, but that's just because I'm a mechanical/aerospace engineer and I tend to see the misteaks they make in their setups. I like the concept. When my kids get a little older I hope to do real-time experiments with them in a similar fashion.
Eh, if I am going to go all the way to C++ we have tools here at work we use...
for post-processing I use a mix of Excel and some in-house tools. All I was trying to say is Excel isn't a bad tool for dumping off some data and drawing some conclusions, or staring with an idea and drawing some ballpark answers. Its not the be-all and end-all but its a good start.
Yeah, disparity in power at the same processing power. Different power in, same amount of processing done. Mobile chips don't magically use less power. That is innovation folks. The intel chip is a lot more efficient. AMD didn't have a mobile chip to compare to.
its a good post-analysis tool for looking at data sets and drawing some conclusions. Like monte carlo analysis and stuff.
Or a stand-alone simulation, when a fullup C++ program is overkill but you can't quite do it on your calculator... (or sliderule for those of you a few years older than me)
Calc sucks. You can't do a tenth of the stuff you can do in Excel in Calc. And I'm not even talking about VBA scripting. Sure, you can make a table with your friends names, their screen names, their favorite colors and their girl friends, but try doing some hardcore data analysis and you will be left dead in the water.
I'm antigoogle myself. They are too big for their britches. But I wanted to make a fair analogy, and google doesn't make web browsers, hence the IE to Firefox analogy. You can choose what you want to believe with regards to w3c and the internet. But creating a "ping attribute", no matter how well you define it, segments the market again just like IE has done, and Netscape tried to before them...
2. Now you alienate any user using another browser
3. Mozilla team is pulling an IE (implementing their own extensions... read the blog... "w3c doesn't have to make all the rules"... if Microsoft said that/. would be up in arms)
Slashdot Mirror
http://money.cnn.com/2006/01/19/news/companies/dis ney_steve/
Oh, and that reminds me of the nicest feature of OS X: That pop-ups can't take the focus away from you. I hate hitting spacebar, thinking I'm typing into Notepad, and actually I've agreed to a window that flashed up on my screen for about a half a second and I'm wondering if I just bought viagra.
Except here in Windowsland the spacebar doesn't consent to a popup, you need a enter key or a mouse click. Not to mention you can change this setting using power tools (or a simple RegEdit.
(And to be honest with you I can't remember the last time I had a Viagara popup... I use Windows 60+ hours a week. The most important part of the security system for your computer lies between the computer and the chair, perhaps yours is in need of an upgrade if this is an issue)
(Chris paints some abstract art and gives it to his father for his birthday)
"Its partially an expression of my teenage angst... But mostly it's a moo-cow!"
Right, but for most of what the moon is good for, we aren't shipping it back to earth. We are shipping to mars or high orbits - avoiding debris. And if we are shipping we have a ton of rock available for the taking to pad our shipment with. Remember, the Russians send up 4 unmanned launches a year, and 2+ manned ones, without incident due to debris. We've only had 1 shuttle incident due to debris, and it was a non-incident. There was a crack in the shuttle's glass pane due to space debris, but it didn't penetrate far enough to be a concern.
Certainly, some types of space salvage (derelict rockets, satellite fragments, etc.) will have a higher value than others (paint flecks, rocket slag, etc.), but even the lowliest dist speck will have value, for the simple reason that it is there.
r ktpow.html. Great. You got your first piece. Now you have to change heading and velocity to intercept piece #2. These vectors aren't all heading in the same direction at the same location. And they are only tracking about 13,000 pieces in NEO ... that's not very many pieces given the vast area of space there is! Consider 13,000 random objects on the surface of the earth, now extend it upwards a hundred meters, and add a volume of 1000m in the vertical direction. Long story short, you can't turn a profit given the fact that you need fuel to power the robot to collect this stuff. And given the fact that commercial ventures are starting to break the price point barrier - check out spaceX - 10k a kg will drop an order of magnitude in the next 10 years, easy.
I understand the argument from the standpont that it cost money to put the salvage into orbit. However "collecting" may wind up costing you more than the fragment itself weighs. Consider: Even if you make it up to LEO for free, you have to get to the item and match your position and velocity in the direction the space salvage is traveling to a degree where you (or your robot, whatever) can grab it. Of course you have to abide by the ideal rocket equation http://exploration.grc.nasa.gov/education/rocket/
Hope they get it solved before the put the Howard Johnson hotel up there
First off, the guy making the space Hotel is Robert Bigelow so it'll be a Budget Suites of America. Secondly the vast majority of spacecraft are lauched from west to east to make use of the earths rotational velocity (roughly 400m/s at the equator). So most of those objects are moving - you guessed it - west to east. As is the space station, the shuttle, etc. If they are all moving in the same direction collision speeds aren't that high. Now there are a few rogue satellites that were lauched the other way for a variety of reasons so yes there are small amounts of space junk moving counter to the flow.
The other thing to keep in mind: 13,000 pieces of junk spread across a sphere bigger than the earth. LEO is 100-300km up, but GEO is 35,000km up. That's a huge hollowed out sphere of area for 13,000 pieces of "space junk", most of which is flowing in the same direction. And the stuff in LEO deorbits pretty quick because of the rarified atmosphere (the same reason we have to boost the space station 1-2 times a year.) While there is a minor threat, it is just that - a minor one.
No, he is PlayfullyClever.
The most important component for virus protection is the one sitting between the chair and the keyboard.
Seconded. An idiot will have as many problems with Linux - even a Mac as he will with Windows (I have seen this firsthand, both the mac and linux case). A little education goes a long way.
Yeah, the hardware looks pretty, but for those of us who are in the engineering and science fields who have needs that can't be met by osx - yea, we won't be buying Macs anytime soon. Gotta wonder how carefully Apple wrote those agreements with the hardware vendors...
Or Apple just had a preference? Is there anything wrong with that? Can a company just decide hey, we like Intel chips? I mean look at Yonah. Its a pretty bitching mobile chip...
No, it's called undervolting. You build the chip to a somewhat higher standard, and they will run stably at much lower voltages, which drastically decreases power consuption and heat output.
And yet, at that undervolting, it can still kick an AMD chip's ass at a processing task.
I have no doubt, if Apple had chosen to use AMD processors instead, AMD would have gone out of their way to rush an effecient dual-core notebook chip to market as well.
and been late to market... Yonah wasn't made for Apple, Yonah was there, and Apple ordered a bunch...
Correct. (which is what I was getting at in the first place)
You don't compile against GCC, etc. So they won't affect the license of you project.
That being said I see no advantage of gpl3 over gpl2.
http://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=174368 &cid=14507186
and yea, my speakers at home do pick up AM radio. Not quite the same phenomenon.
Between Discovery, TLC and the History Channel there is a lot of good educational content. Between the triumvirate there are more shows that tend to appeal to younger audiences (like miami ink, American Chopper, etc) than there used to be and recently TLC has been jumping on the home improvement bandwagon (which isn't all bad, especially as a homeowner) but there are still a lot of good shows like Modern Marvels, Extreme Engineering, Monster Garage, and then the specials that any given channel will do (Discovery does a lot on modern aircraft and structures, history of course on historical events, etc.) And I only watch about an hour of TV a day...
I do tend to find a lot of bones to pick with Mythbusters, but that's just because I'm a mechanical/aerospace engineer and I tend to see the misteaks they make in their setups. I like the concept. When my kids get a little older I hope to do real-time experiments with them in a similar fashion.
C++ does the work (I'm a simulation programmer), Excel makes the money (pretty charts convince them to keep paying me).
Eh, if I am going to go all the way to C++ we have tools here at work we use...
for post-processing I use a mix of Excel and some in-house tools. All I was trying to say is Excel isn't a bad tool for dumping off some data and drawing some conclusions, or staring with an idea and drawing some ballpark answers. Its not the be-all and end-all but its a good start.
Yeah, disparity in power at the same processing power. Different power in, same amount of processing done. Mobile chips don't magically use less power. That is innovation folks. The intel chip is a lot more efficient. AMD didn't have a mobile chip to compare to.
People who do "hardcore data analysis" will not be using a spreadsheet anyway.
At its price point Excel makes a good post-processing data analysis tool. Its no matlab but its several thousand dollars cheaper.
its a good post-analysis tool for looking at data sets and drawing some conclusions. Like monte carlo analysis and stuff.
Or a stand-alone simulation, when a fullup C++ program is overkill but you can't quite do it on your calculator... (or sliderule for those of you a few years older than me)
Calc sucks. You can't do a tenth of the stuff you can do in Excel in Calc. And I'm not even talking about VBA scripting. Sure, you can make a table with your friends names, their screen names, their favorite colors and their girl friends, but try doing some hardcore data analysis and you will be left dead in the water.
...and if you arent running SP2 on XP you have bigger problems
Uder to Bug
*swats tail*
I'm antigoogle myself. They are too big for their britches. But I wanted to make a fair analogy, and google doesn't make web browsers, hence the IE to Firefox analogy. You can choose what you want to believe with regards to w3c and the internet. But creating a "ping attribute", no matter how well you define it, segments the market again just like IE has done, and Netscape tried to before them...
1. Javascript does it already
... if Microsoft said that /. would be up in arms)
2. Now you alienate any user using another browser
3. Mozilla team is pulling an IE (implementing their own extensions... read the blog... "w3c doesn't have to make all the rules"