Shuttle Columbia's hydrazine tanks became unprotected at an altitude of 64km, between 9 and 9.5 minutes into a 10 minute window of highest temperature and stress. The satellite was to perform an uncontrolled re-entry from 210 km with no shielding designed for re-entry. Given that Columbia's hydrazine tanks vaporized most of their contents in such a late stage of exposure, I would find it extremely hard to believe that the tank might survive with any of its contents intact.
Then again, I'd also be surprised if the structure of the vehicle itself wasn't designed to completely vaporize on re-entry. Personally, I'd want to design all of the mechanical connections out of a high magnesium alloy specifically designed to ignite and break apart with the heat of re-entry, wrap the hydrazine tank in the same alloy, and encapsulate any sensitive components in it. By designing the satellite to use it for structural support you should be able to eliminate the added-weight factor, too. Of course, I'm not a rocket scientist, so I have no experience with such materials.
As I recall, the 'edge of space' is the point at which the atmosphere is thin enough that the required velocity to generate lift is the same as that for orbit, so the lift becomes pointless.
In essence, to "Test the GPL in Court" and find it invalid, would mean invalidating *copyright law* to a certain degree. In other words, this is not going to happen.
Not necessarily. The GPL allows an individual holding a copy to do more than he would otherwise be able to do when operating strictly under copyright law, but with those additional rights come additional responsibilities in the license. If you were able to poke a hole in those responsibilities (You can't make someone responsible for doing *that*!), then the whole GPL would be rendered unenforceable and all code protected by it would revert to copyright law protections. This would make further distribution of the code impossible except by the copyright holders, and might make the extant copies illegal because they were not distributed in accordance with a valid license or contract.
I say the whole GPL would be rendered unenforceable because I see no severability clause within the GPL v2 or v3, except for a particular limited case in v2. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
It might also cause any other EULA's containing similar restrictions to become invalid in whole or part, depending on their similarities and severability clauses.
If you acquire a legitimate copy of a book, which is to say, one that was published in accordance with copyright laws and then sold and resold from the publisher to the vendor to you, then you've acquired material properly created in accordance with copyright law and therefore have the legal right to use it, as provided for in copyright law itself.
Likewise, if you receive a copy of a GPL piece of software from a distributor properly complying with the GPL, you've acquired material properly created in accordance with copyright law and therefore have the legal right to use it. No license to use it is required. GPL v2 specifically states this with point 5.
5. You are not required to accept this License, since you have not signed it. However, nothing else grants you permission to modify or distribute the Program or its derivative works. These actions are prohibited by law if you do not accept this License. Therefore, by modifying or distributing the Program (or any work based on the Program), you indicate your acceptance of this License to do so, and all its terms and conditions for copying, distributing or modifying the Program or works based on it.
GPL v3 addresses this with point 9.
9. Acceptance Not Required for Having Copies. You are not required to accept this License in order to receive or run a copy of the Program. Ancillary propagation of a covered work occurring solely as a consequence of using peer-to-peer transmission to receive a copy likewise does not require acceptance. However, nothing other than this License grants you permission to propagate or modify any covered work. These actions infringe copyright if you do not accept this License. Therefore, by modifying or propagating a covered work, you indicate your acceptance of this License to do so.
In this sense, it is an agreement with END USERS. Among other things, it grants to the end user the permission to run the software. It also addresses distribution, but that is not the point.
I also states that you get it without any warranties (non-infringement, merchantability, fitness for a purpose, etc.). And it states that even if you think you had damages because of the use of the software, you'd have no right to recover anything.
If you refuse to accept the GPL, you can still use the program. As the license says, it is explicitly affirming a right you already have. And the no warranty includes an 'unless required by applicable law' statement. So you can go right on using that program whether or not you agree to the license. If you want to redistribute it, or changes you made to it, copyright law prohibits you from doing that so you must then agree to the license.
I had ports 25 and 80 inbound blocked on my last cable provider, as well. They have a "no servers" clause in the contract, so they block port 80 and port 25 under those grounds. It also helps to prevent open relays on their network, and since you're not allowed to run a server in the first place, they don't have any problem preventing all incoming traffic on the port. Again, I could have purchased a business plan for a similar premium.
The equivalent 15/2 residential package is $52.99. I therefore presume that they consider the value of static IP, unblocking of ports, and no 'no servers' clause in the contract to be worth $47.00 per month. These things are bundled together, and if you don't want to pay the extra $47, no servers for you.
In my opinion, they're charging way too much for the extra 'features' (which are really the removal of something actively added to cripple the service in the first place), but they are still offering them to you, just at a price. That's capitalism (combined with government sanctioned monopolies) for you.
I wish that Verizon did not block ports 25 and 80. I already have FIOSTV and would switch to their internet service in a heartbeat but I don't want to give up my web and mail servers.
They'd be happy to unblock those for you, and give you a static ip, for $99.99 per month with a 2 year agreement.
I figure I'll be dead or demented before we get any meaningful value from standing on Mars, so I've focused my efforts on teaching my daughters that humans were not designed to live on other planets in our solar system and that we don't live long enough to make it safely to an exoplanet where we might be able to live.
I disagree, I think that the problems are merely technical and can be solved within the next couple hundred years, if we make it that long.
Presuming we could create a craft capable of continuous 1g acceleration, relativistic effects would mean that apparent time on board to any star within the nearest known 100 stars (22 light years) would be 6.2 years. To the galactic center, 30,000 light years away, would be about 20 years. If you want to push the acceleration a little, to, say, 1.25 g's, you can make it in about 17 apparent years. Add another 6 months to make it to the other side of the galaxy.
Primary concerns would be shielding and a method of propulsion capable of that acceleration. And, of course, being able to pinpoint suitable sites for colonization before leaving. I personally think that we should be able to locate an earthlike habitable planet in the same few hundred years of space exploration development. If one exists. And I think the idea that one exists within our galaxy to be within the realm of possibility.
The American Revolution was not a resistance group. It was a regular army, fighting a war of independence, and adhered to the period's conventions of honorable warfare. So no, they would not be viewed as terrorist threats by today's laws. (snip)...
That sounds like a reasonable definition. The colonial rebels did nothing of the sort. They declared their independence from the crown by writing a letter, and Britain responded in force, as they deemed it was their right to do. (snip)
In 1765, the Sons of Liberty were formed in response to the Stamp Act, they threatened violence upon anyone selling the stamps. (The stamps were designations that the appropriate tax had been paid on the article.) "In Boston, the Sons of Liberty burned the records of the vice-admiralty court and looted the elegant home of the chief justice, Thomas Hutchinson." - wikipedia (yes, its not a great authoritative source, but its handy and these aren't facts in dispute.)
In 1767, the Boston Massacre, a major incident where British soldiers fired upon civilians, was instigated by the civilians first mobbing and pelting the soldiers with debris.
In 1772, American patriots burned a British warship.
In 1773, a group of men dumped £10,000 worth of tea in to the harbor in the Boston Tea Party.
In 1774, in response to the passing of several British acts (The Intolerable Acts), the First Continental Congress called for the formation of militias.
In 1775, when the British sent a regiment to seize a stockpile of the growing insurgencies arms, a skirmish erupted resulting in 273 British casualties. The insurgents laid seige to Boston and eventually the British were forced to evacuate the city.
In 1776, the Declaration of Independence was issued.
Now, I've made sure to cast the revolutionaries in a poor light, here, because that's the sort of news the British would be receiving back in London. It wasn't until after the battle of Concord and Lexington in 1775 that the Continental Army would formally be created.
That reminds me- in jr. high, we had a bonus question on a science test: "What will be the first country to land on Mars?" The teacher warned us it was a trick question. The correct answer was, of course "Multiple countries will have to work together."
By 'land on mars', did the teacher mean people or objects? Because the Soviets landed on Mars in 1971 though of the two probes one crashed and the other ceased transmission within moments of landing. The US made the first successful landing in 1982, and has since put several rovers on the surface, two of which are still operating.
Except that spoofed mail isn't necessarily bad. I have a gmail account which I use to aggregate a couple of other email addresses that I commonly send messages from and receive mail to. Gmail allows me to send messages out with these addresses after an email exchange with the address to verify that I have access and permission to perform that activity. Preventing spoofing will mean I have to use the actual accounts themselves, which is at best inconvenient.
Fascinating, and with clear skies that would aid your telescopes as well by lessening atmospheric disturbances. Sounds like you'll just need a whole lot more solar panels, then. Though I'm curious, without much wind, how do they stay free of snow? Heating systems installed in them?
I don't think people question the use of jet fuel for this project so much on environmental grounds as on maintainability grounds. 4000l of fuel will eventually need to be replenished. Installing more solar, wind turbines, and gyroscopic batteries designed to be maintenance free over a long life could reduce the need for service from semiannual or annual to once per decade. Obviously, everything will at some point need service but if you can install sufficient spares then you'll only need to go out there when power plant failures reach a particular threshold.
Also, I'm thinking that such a desolate place would be a great location for an entirely airdropped system. Drop different components as autonomous units from a high altitude with a guided parachute system and gps and give each device its own backup power source with enough power to run on its own for maybe 24 hours. When they land have them figure out where they all are relative to each other and design a system where the power plants actually beam power via microwave to the power consuming units and each other, making a self-correcting power grid. As a bonus, if a gadget like a wind turbine gets frozen up, redirect a power beam to the freeze and melt the ice off!
Ok, I know, I'm just dreaming now, but it does sound cool!
Was wind not viable? Or is this just the pilot, with installed instruments monitoring wind to determine what parameters you'll need for a permanent wind turbine? As a pilot project, I can see going with simpler tech such as a generator in the early phase and adding wind turbines at a later date. You'd have to find some extremely durable maintenance free wind turbines for that location, but with 1kw wind turbines in the $3k range, you could easily place several around the site to handle the inevitable failure of one or more units. Plus, you could allow the fuel to turn to gel if you contain the fuel in multiple tanks and use a resistance heater (or two, for failure modes) in each tank and just turn it on when you need to melt the fuel to run it through the generator. You really don't need to keep all the fuel melted at once, just one tank.
Of course, all this is probably already addressed, I'm just full of $0.02 like everyone else here.:)
Oops, the Tylenol Cold Severe Congestion is 2/dose x 6 hours, so the pack is 72 hours, so my purchase covered 5.5 days. (5.5/1.32*9=37.5 days) So the monthly limit translate to about 37 person-days of doses.
I recently had a cold and purchased a bottle of Nyquil D (295ml@30ml/dose=10 doses x 6 hours = 60 hours) and Tylenol Cold Severe Congestion (24 caplets, 2/dose x 4 hours = 48 hours). (60 + 48 hours / 24 hours per day = 4.5 days) My bill indicated that I purchased 1.32 grams of pseudoephedrine of my daily limit of 3.6 grams (monthly limit is 9 grams). If I tried to purchase my montly limit, I'd have enough pseudoephedrine to last 30 days.
Now, I think the law is stupid and hinders the casual purchaser far more than the local drug lab, but it does allow me to purchase as much of the drug as I'm likely to need in a reasonable period of time. Even if I'm buying for several adults at home, if I need 30 person-days of pseudoephedrine in a 3 day period I'm probably going to be in the hospital soon anyways.
The Slashdot consensus doesn't care much for copyright
A) unless the violator is taking a notable profit, OR B) but we do care about Trademark infringement.
I'd like to think its the latter. That's the way I personally lean. I feel that a company goes through a lot to keep its good name and when it stamps a product as its own, I can expect that the product has a particular set of qualities to it. When someone infringes on that trademark, not only are they profiting at the expense of the trademark owner, but any problems the consumer encounters will cost the trademark owner in good will.
On the other hand, around here people seem to feel that if it isn't for profit, then copy away. The overwhelming opinion tends to be that if sharing is done without the intent of commercial advantage, then share away.
I'd log min, max, avg, and mean, in addition to the minute-by-minute coordinates. But I'm just pointing out that its data that hasn't been provided to us and could be rather critical to the case.
But we haven't been told the log rate. If the log rate is 1 log entry per second, then that's fine. If the log rate is 1 log entry per minute, then is it the high, average, or mean?
How about, once the button is pushed then it *will* record for the next 60 minutes. Though the 'record' light will turn off the second time the button is pushed. If you're recording video & audio and can write 15 fps at 320x240 to mp4 I think that would run 1 GB/hr/video, so 5GB/hr would be reasonable, and with laptop drives running under $100 for 160GB you could store 32 hours of five camera views, so one hour for the loop and up to 30 snapshot hours. 30 fps should still allow you 14 hour-long snapshots and one loop, though I don't think 30fps is required for this application.
Slashdot Mirror
Then again, I'd also be surprised if the structure of the vehicle itself wasn't designed to completely vaporize on re-entry. Personally, I'd want to design all of the mechanical connections out of a high magnesium alloy specifically designed to ignite and break apart with the heat of re-entry, wrap the hydrazine tank in the same alloy, and encapsulate any sensitive components in it. By designing the satellite to use it for structural support you should be able to eliminate the added-weight factor, too. Of course, I'm not a rocket scientist, so I have no experience with such materials.
As I recall, the 'edge of space' is the point at which the atmosphere is thin enough that the required velocity to generate lift is the same as that for orbit, so the lift becomes pointless.
Not necessarily. The GPL allows an individual holding a copy to do more than he would otherwise be able to do when operating strictly under copyright law, but with those additional rights come additional responsibilities in the license. If you were able to poke a hole in those responsibilities (You can't make someone responsible for doing *that*!), then the whole GPL would be rendered unenforceable and all code protected by it would revert to copyright law protections. This would make further distribution of the code impossible except by the copyright holders, and might make the extant copies illegal because they were not distributed in accordance with a valid license or contract.
I say the whole GPL would be rendered unenforceable because I see no severability clause within the GPL v2 or v3, except for a particular limited case in v2. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
It might also cause any other EULA's containing similar restrictions to become invalid in whole or part, depending on their similarities and severability clauses.
Likewise, if you receive a copy of a GPL piece of software from a distributor properly complying with the GPL, you've acquired material properly created in accordance with copyright law and therefore have the legal right to use it. No license to use it is required. GPL v2 specifically states this with point 5.
GPL v3 addresses this with point 9.
I had ports 25 and 80 inbound blocked on my last cable provider, as well. They have a "no servers" clause in the contract, so they block port 80 and port 25 under those grounds. It also helps to prevent open relays on their network, and since you're not allowed to run a server in the first place, they don't have any problem preventing all incoming traffic on the port. Again, I could have purchased a business plan for a similar premium.
The equivalent 15/2 residential package is $52.99. I therefore presume that they consider the value of static IP, unblocking of ports, and no 'no servers' clause in the contract to be worth $47.00 per month. These things are bundled together, and if you don't want to pay the extra $47, no servers for you. In my opinion, they're charging way too much for the extra 'features' (which are really the removal of something actively added to cripple the service in the first place), but they are still offering them to you, just at a price. That's capitalism (combined with government sanctioned monopolies) for you.
I disagree, I think that the problems are merely technical and can be solved within the next couple hundred years, if we make it that long.
Presuming we could create a craft capable of continuous 1g acceleration, relativistic effects would mean that apparent time on board to any star within the nearest known 100 stars (22 light years) would be 6.2 years. To the galactic center, 30,000 light years away, would be about 20 years. If you want to push the acceleration a little, to, say, 1.25 g's, you can make it in about 17 apparent years. Add another 6 months to make it to the other side of the galaxy.
Primary concerns would be shielding and a method of propulsion capable of that acceleration. And, of course, being able to pinpoint suitable sites for colonization before leaving. I personally think that we should be able to locate an earthlike habitable planet in the same few hundred years of space exploration development. If one exists. And I think the idea that one exists within our galaxy to be within the realm of possibility.
In 1765, the Sons of Liberty were formed in response to the Stamp Act, they threatened violence upon anyone selling the stamps. (The stamps were designations that the appropriate tax had been paid on the article.) "In Boston, the Sons of Liberty burned the records of the vice-admiralty court and looted the elegant home of the chief justice, Thomas Hutchinson." - wikipedia (yes, its not a great authoritative source, but its handy and these aren't facts in dispute.)
In 1767, the Boston Massacre, a major incident where British soldiers fired upon civilians, was instigated by the civilians first mobbing and pelting the soldiers with debris.
In 1772, American patriots burned a British warship.
In 1773, a group of men dumped £10,000 worth of tea in to the harbor in the Boston Tea Party.
In 1774, in response to the passing of several British acts (The Intolerable Acts), the First Continental Congress called for the formation of militias.
In 1775, when the British sent a regiment to seize a stockpile of the growing insurgencies arms, a skirmish erupted resulting in 273 British casualties. The insurgents laid seige to Boston and eventually the British were forced to evacuate the city.
In 1776, the Declaration of Independence was issued.
Now, I've made sure to cast the revolutionaries in a poor light, here, because that's the sort of news the British would be receiving back in London. It wasn't until after the battle of Concord and Lexington in 1775 that the Continental Army would formally be created.
So, terrorists or not?
Mea culpa. I was reading the 'termination' column, not the 'arrival' column.
By 'land on mars', did the teacher mean people or objects? Because the Soviets landed on Mars in 1971 though of the two probes one crashed and the other ceased transmission within moments of landing. The US made the first successful landing in 1982, and has since put several rovers on the surface, two of which are still operating.
That would mean revealing the actual address, and some of the accounts are anti-spam aggregators, I don't want those accounts seeing the real address.
Except that spoofed mail isn't necessarily bad. I have a gmail account which I use to aggregate a couple of other email addresses that I commonly send messages from and receive mail to. Gmail allows me to send messages out with these addresses after an email exchange with the address to verify that I have access and permission to perform that activity. Preventing spoofing will mean I have to use the actual accounts themselves, which is at best inconvenient.
They can simply refuse to allow the laptop into the country. And, possibly, you.
Fascinating, and with clear skies that would aid your telescopes as well by lessening atmospheric disturbances. Sounds like you'll just need a whole lot more solar panels, then. Though I'm curious, without much wind, how do they stay free of snow? Heating systems installed in them?
Also, I'm thinking that such a desolate place would be a great location for an entirely airdropped system. Drop different components as autonomous units from a high altitude with a guided parachute system and gps and give each device its own backup power source with enough power to run on its own for maybe 24 hours. When they land have them figure out where they all are relative to each other and design a system where the power plants actually beam power via microwave to the power consuming units and each other, making a self-correcting power grid. As a bonus, if a gadget like a wind turbine gets frozen up, redirect a power beam to the freeze and melt the ice off!
Ok, I know, I'm just dreaming now, but it does sound cool!
Of course, all this is probably already addressed, I'm just full of $0.02 like everyone else here. :)
Oops, the Tylenol Cold Severe Congestion is 2/dose x 6 hours, so the pack is 72 hours, so my purchase covered 5.5 days. (5.5/1.32*9=37.5 days) So the monthly limit translate to about 37 person-days of doses.
I recently had a cold and purchased a bottle of Nyquil D (295ml@30ml/dose=10 doses x 6 hours = 60 hours) and Tylenol Cold Severe Congestion (24 caplets, 2/dose x 4 hours = 48 hours). (60 + 48 hours / 24 hours per day = 4.5 days) My bill indicated that I purchased 1.32 grams of pseudoephedrine of my daily limit of 3.6 grams (monthly limit is 9 grams). If I tried to purchase my montly limit, I'd have enough pseudoephedrine to last 30 days. Now, I think the law is stupid and hinders the casual purchaser far more than the local drug lab, but it does allow me to purchase as much of the drug as I'm likely to need in a reasonable period of time. Even if I'm buying for several adults at home, if I need 30 person-days of pseudoephedrine in a 3 day period I'm probably going to be in the hospital soon anyways.
The Slashdot consensus doesn't care much for copyright
A) unless the violator is taking a notable profit, OR
B) but we do care about Trademark infringement.
I'd like to think its the latter. That's the way I personally lean. I feel that a company goes through a lot to keep its good name and when it stamps a product as its own, I can expect that the product has a particular set of qualities to it. When someone infringes on that trademark, not only are they profiting at the expense of the trademark owner, but any problems the consumer encounters will cost the trademark owner in good will.
On the other hand, around here people seem to feel that if it isn't for profit, then copy away. The overwhelming opinion tends to be that if sharing is done without the intent of commercial advantage, then share away.
I'd log min, max, avg, and mean, in addition to the minute-by-minute coordinates. But I'm just pointing out that its data that hasn't been provided to us and could be rather critical to the case.
But we haven't been told the log rate. If the log rate is 1 log entry per second, then that's fine. If the log rate is 1 log entry per minute, then is it the high, average, or mean?
How about, once the button is pushed then it *will* record for the next 60 minutes. Though the 'record' light will turn off the second time the button is pushed. If you're recording video & audio and can write 15 fps at 320x240 to mp4 I think that would run 1 GB/hr/video, so 5GB/hr would be reasonable, and with laptop drives running under $100 for 160GB you could store 32 hours of five camera views, so one hour for the loop and up to 30 snapshot hours. 30 fps should still allow you 14 hour-long snapshots and one loop, though I don't think 30fps is required for this application.
Ricer, from Rice Burner, in reference to the staple food of the manufacturers of the japanese cars the term was originally applied to.