That is why in science one uses Occam's Razor. If one has to choose between say abstracting the solar system as planets turning around the sun or sun and planets turning around the Earth, then a scientist would use the first abstraction. Both can be made to work but the first one is the easiest one to use to make predictions, and it fits all observable data (at the time). That did not 'prove' that the planets orbit the sun under ID's definition of proof. Of course, that theory was later shown to be incorrect when some planets did not orbit in the paths that that theory predicted. We had 'observable' data that did not fit with the theory. A new theory came along and the errors in the theory were corrected. However, the old theory is still used because for certain uses it is correct enough and there is no need to complicate things.
Now, if the choice is between a theory that explains things without the need for an omnipotent being not subject to the rules it creates for its 'creation' and one that uses the body of science that has so far correlated (mostly) with observations, then a scientist would choose the one not requiring such a being. A theologian, which is a different branch of human though may decide to go with the 'external inteligence' but that would be a theological theory not a scientific one.
Of course I am being very lax in defining ID as a scientific theory because the use of such an intelligence is not probable. It may be that there is an effect in nature that may be misinterpreted as intelligence, but it is a very far fetched idea that currently does not deserve to be taught to the non-scientific public. However, if it does have some validity, I am sure that some scientist or another will stake its future and do studies and publish in the scientific record. If there is something there he/she may cause a revolution in science, if there is not, then he/she will be one amongst many that pursued an idea which the community though had little value.
There is always room in the scientific community for mavericks, some even dig out precious gems, and we can all cite examples of those, then again there are those that are way off the mark and just wither away.
It's just hard to understand why so much energy would be wasted by people that have no stake in the scientific process to try and subvert it to a different agenda. In the end either Earth is the center of the universe because the supreme creator set us as being the most central part of his creation, or it doesn't. Either way if it is something that can be known, we will probably figure it out.
So how do you stop the gyro without returning that moment to the spacecraft? You still need some kind of mechanism to desaturate the gyros, particularly if the saturation is coming from imbalances on the thrust from your main propulsion, other leaks, or external pressures on your exposed surfaces. The gyros are good for quick repositioning or holding a particular attitude but eventually you need to desaturate them by using some kind of rocket to slow them down.
But think about the environmental impact of doing something like that. You are wasting a non-renewable resource that rightly belongs to everyone on Earth. I don't think anyone should be able to do something like that until we are really clear on the impact on Earths like from the rotation slowdown that would happen from this. Even more I think we should impose a ban on any and all fly-by assisted missions.
Funny TFA says a quart of GAS (regular gas which I agree with you is not what you want to have plus the military doesn't really have the logistics for). I suspect the real thing will use JP-8 as you mention, which is nothing more than a cleaner DIESEL with different additives and filtering.
And the end result is that the brits lost the lead in both technologies. At least were it matters which is the public corporation. All the IP and money out this was made for a long time by American corporations almost exclusively. Ohh well, at least the island is safe.
I think that is possible. A girl that studies with me has 3 laptops and a desktop. She has that many laptops because after having them for about a year they would slow down to much and she would buy a new one. She finally got one with enough protection off the shelf that she hasn't being infected with anything yet. Is that novice enough for you?
I have three computers at home, plus a KuroBox running my mail server, and LDAP for centralized accounts. I was going to set it up as an NFS server for homes but I haven't been able to use AMANDA to back it up. For some reason it hangs xinetd. Anyway, the Kuro takes no power whatsoever and the other machines can be up and running as needed.
For backups what I did is buy the biggest IDE drive I could find and set it up on my machine. I run AMANDA and set it up to backup to that drive, it does compression and it tries to keep at least one full backup of every drive so it doesn't really follow a set schedule of backups which I like since sometimes the machines are off or booted into Windows. AMANDA sees the big drive as a set of 8 100GB tapes and it uses an autochanger routine to move. Since I don't use / as the whole drive but break things down with LVM it has never ran out of space for backups, plus sparse files take no room. I probably could haveee gotten away with smaller tapes and have more allowing me to keep a longer backup history but so far it's been good.
VERY HANDS OFF.
Make a fake and make sure there is another car with the same plate and chang e it when the CCTV is not looking. Then get away and lough while the police follows the wrong car and are not capable of following you because they put all their resources on a dumb TV system that cannot adapt to a human attacking it. Duhhh!!!!
Just like Microsoft threatend to leave the Korean market if laws were made that made it too complex for them to satisfy we would consider fair. Why can't RIMM do the same. Look I would love to give the government service but it makes it too complex give the results from our lawsuit. We unfortunately will have to turn off your service. Only fair.
I think the original poster has a point. The CIA upon finding out that the USSR was acquiring Western technology through a side deal, managed to convince the companies in question to go ahead with the deal but add a bit of tricquery so that the devices (I think they were computerized controllers of some kind), would pass inspection but fail early in service. These devices were used in a gas pipe and caused the biggest explosion outside of an atomic bomb and substantial cost and damage to a vital USSR infrastructure.
If we can do it to them, can they do it to us? In particular if we have done it in the past to someone we don't like, why would anyone trust a closed product made by an american company?
* Off-topic, but can someone explain to me why (at least with ISC dhcpd) I can't assign IPs on two different subnets on the same physical LAN? Can this be done with a different DHCP server? Is there any kind of limitation to the protocol that makes this impossible, or is it just an implementation problem?
If I remember correctly a request for IP is done to the broadcast address which unless you already know on which subner you are is 255.255.255.255. That puts the server in a bind, which subnet should I give this machine an IP from? So unless you have something that ties an IP to a MAC address then it breaks down. I am sure some has a DHCP server that works around that problem though.
Maybe the machines already know in which subnet they are then the broadcast would be to 192.168.1.255 for example but there is a lot of room for error because it realy depends on the machine knowing a lot of info about the network before hand.
Maybe a quick read of the standard would make it clearer for you? Another option is using VLAN or some other trick like that?
From what I've been able to understand from other people that know a lot about this than me. The main gain in going from the classic 32bit x86 architecture to the AMD64/x86-64 is that they bring into play some of the things learned from the RISC architecture. Lots of registers that can be used instead of the much slower main memory. The speed comes not from the 64bit wide bus but from being able to use this very fast registers to hold and pass information. So until compilers optimize for using registers instead of the stack, then little will be gained except for higher memory requirements.
If one reads Tim Cockerill's theses it is clear that the tube by itself needs no electricity but you need a source of 600 kPa air which will not come wihtout electricity or a lot of work by someone. This is not the most efficient way of making a cooler. For those that wonder what happened to the second law of thermodynamics.
From TC's thesis:
"The Clausius Statment of the 2nd law of thermodynamics reads:
It is impossible to construct a system which will operate in a cycle and transfer heat from a cooler body to a hotter body without work being done on the system by the surroundings."
He then proceeds to show that the system MUST include the compressor, and the you have a cycle where the compressed air is used to establish the rotating vortex and you can get cooler air on one side and hotter air from the other at atmospheric pressure. The inlet to the compressor closes the loop by sucking the air back from the atmosphere and keeping this going.
So no laws are broken but if you have a way to efficiently make compressed something without electricity, then it should be a lot more efficient to run an expansion valve like a regular refrigerator.
If you have to burn paraffin (or kerosene) then use a regular paraffin or kerosene refrigerator. Those have been around for ages.
I guess you don't feel the irony uh? To me it _IS_ pretty ironic that MS did not receive any penalty while Standard Oil did. I guess we have different definitions of the term, or maybe I should not be writing ironic comments in \.
It doesn't look too drastic. What it says is that everyone licensing under the GPL allows everyone else to defend themselves against lawsuits due to Patent or other IP related lawsuits by revoking their right to a license under the GPL. Essentially u sue us we take our ball and go home.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/09/06/fsf_patent _gpl/
If they start using illegal means to do that then they may get stuck with being labeled a monopoly and broken down. The US does not tolerate that behavior from anyone, look at what happened to Standard Oil? (So you feel the irony?)
Well they still have the processes. A lot of the company's doing the outsourcing work in India are Indian. The know how belongs to Indian's not americans. That makes it potentially easier for them to hold on to their work because they have more than just cheap wages. If that was the case then it would be very easy to outsource to say Ethiopia. Eastern Europe has some advantages but it is not clear to me that wages make _that_ much of a difference.
Slashdot Mirror
That is why in science one uses Occam's Razor. If one has to choose between say abstracting the solar system as planets turning around the sun or sun and planets turning around the Earth, then a scientist would use the first abstraction. Both can be made to work but the first one is the easiest one to use to make predictions, and it fits all observable data (at the time). That did not 'prove' that the planets orbit the sun under ID's definition of proof. Of course, that theory was later shown to be incorrect when some planets did not orbit in the paths that that theory predicted. We had 'observable' data that did not fit with the theory. A new theory came along and the errors in the theory were corrected. However, the old theory is still used because for certain uses it is correct enough and there is no need to complicate things. Now, if the choice is between a theory that explains things without the need for an omnipotent being not subject to the rules it creates for its 'creation' and one that uses the body of science that has so far correlated (mostly) with observations, then a scientist would choose the one not requiring such a being. A theologian, which is a different branch of human though may decide to go with the 'external inteligence' but that would be a theological theory not a scientific one. Of course I am being very lax in defining ID as a scientific theory because the use of such an intelligence is not probable. It may be that there is an effect in nature that may be misinterpreted as intelligence, but it is a very far fetched idea that currently does not deserve to be taught to the non-scientific public. However, if it does have some validity, I am sure that some scientist or another will stake its future and do studies and publish in the scientific record. If there is something there he/she may cause a revolution in science, if there is not, then he/she will be one amongst many that pursued an idea which the community though had little value. There is always room in the scientific community for mavericks, some even dig out precious gems, and we can all cite examples of those, then again there are those that are way off the mark and just wither away. It's just hard to understand why so much energy would be wasted by people that have no stake in the scientific process to try and subvert it to a different agenda. In the end either Earth is the center of the universe because the supreme creator set us as being the most central part of his creation, or it doesn't. Either way if it is something that can be known, we will probably figure it out.
Or when detecting a lower quantity of neutrinos than you expecting saying that one can change into the other?
Yes I was, glad you got it.
So how do you stop the gyro without returning that moment to the spacecraft? You still need some kind of mechanism to desaturate the gyros, particularly if the saturation is coming from imbalances on the thrust from your main propulsion, other leaks, or external pressures on your exposed surfaces. The gyros are good for quick repositioning or holding a particular attitude but eventually you need to desaturate them by using some kind of rocket to slow them down.
But think about the environmental impact of doing something like that. You are wasting a non-renewable resource that rightly belongs to everyone on Earth. I don't think anyone should be able to do something like that until we are really clear on the impact on Earths like from the rotation slowdown that would happen from this. Even more I think we should impose a ban on any and all fly-by assisted missions.
Pah British pounds are lighter, old world and shriveled. These are new world pounds, much heavier. :)
Funny TFA says a quart of GAS (regular gas which I agree with you is not what you want to have plus the military doesn't really have the logistics for). I suspect the real thing will use JP-8 as you mention, which is nothing more than a cleaner DIESEL with different additives and filtering.
And the end result is that the brits lost the lead in both technologies. At least were it matters which is the public corporation. All the IP and money out this was made for a long time by American corporations almost exclusively. Ohh well, at least the island is safe.
Just send the poor sap, 5 tons of printed documentation with what he's looking buried in there. He probably cannot pay for a good layer anyway.
I think that is possible. A girl that studies with me has 3 laptops and a desktop. She has that many laptops because after having them for about a year they would slow down to much and she would buy a new one. She finally got one with enough protection off the shelf that she hasn't being infected with anything yet. Is that novice enough for you?
I thought you were allowed counterclaims in the response to the claims.
I didn't realize you were being ironic. Too subtle for my American ears. Are you British?
O5? What compiler are you using that can do O5? gcc does O, O2, O3 and Os as far as I know.
I have three computers at home, plus a KuroBox running my mail server, and LDAP for centralized accounts. I was going to set it up as an NFS server for homes but I haven't been able to use AMANDA to back it up. For some reason it hangs xinetd. Anyway, the Kuro takes no power whatsoever and the other machines can be up and running as needed. For backups what I did is buy the biggest IDE drive I could find and set it up on my machine. I run AMANDA and set it up to backup to that drive, it does compression and it tries to keep at least one full backup of every drive so it doesn't really follow a set schedule of backups which I like since sometimes the machines are off or booted into Windows. AMANDA sees the big drive as a set of 8 100GB tapes and it uses an autochanger routine to move. Since I don't use / as the whole drive but break things down with LVM it has never ran out of space for backups, plus sparse files take no room. I probably could haveee gotten away with smaller tapes and have more allowing me to keep a longer backup history but so far it's been good. VERY HANDS OFF.
Make a fake and make sure there is another car with the same plate and chang e it when the CCTV is not looking. Then get away and lough while the police follows the wrong car and are not capable of following you because they put all their resources on a dumb TV system that cannot adapt to a human attacking it. Duhhh!!!!
Just like Microsoft threatend to leave the Korean market if laws were made that made it too complex for them to satisfy we would consider fair. Why can't RIMM do the same. Look I would love to give the government service but it makes it too complex give the results from our lawsuit. We unfortunately will have to turn off your service. Only fair.
I think the original poster has a point. The CIA upon finding out that the USSR was acquiring Western technology through a side deal, managed to convince the companies in question to go ahead with the deal but add a bit of tricquery so that the devices (I think they were computerized controllers of some kind), would pass inspection but fail early in service. These devices were used in a gas pipe and caused the biggest explosion outside of an atomic bomb and substantial cost and damage to a vital USSR infrastructure. If we can do it to them, can they do it to us? In particular if we have done it in the past to someone we don't like, why would anyone trust a closed product made by an american company?
* Off-topic, but can someone explain to me why (at least with ISC dhcpd) I can't assign IPs on two different subnets on the same physical LAN? Can this be done with a different DHCP server? Is there any kind of limitation to the protocol that makes this impossible, or is it just an implementation problem? If I remember correctly a request for IP is done to the broadcast address which unless you already know on which subner you are is 255.255.255.255. That puts the server in a bind, which subnet should I give this machine an IP from? So unless you have something that ties an IP to a MAC address then it breaks down. I am sure some has a DHCP server that works around that problem though. Maybe the machines already know in which subnet they are then the broadcast would be to 192.168.1.255 for example but there is a lot of room for error because it realy depends on the machine knowing a lot of info about the network before hand. Maybe a quick read of the standard would make it clearer for you? Another option is using VLAN or some other trick like that?
Actually, the one that matter, namely the government is protected. :)
From what I've been able to understand from other people that know a lot about this than me. The main gain in going from the classic 32bit x86 architecture to the AMD64/x86-64 is that they bring into play some of the things learned from the RISC architecture. Lots of registers that can be used instead of the much slower main memory. The speed comes not from the 64bit wide bus but from being able to use this very fast registers to hold and pass information. So until compilers optimize for using registers instead of the stack, then little will be gained except for higher memory requirements.
If one reads Tim Cockerill's theses it is clear that the tube by itself needs no electricity but you need a source of 600 kPa air which will not come wihtout electricity or a lot of work by someone. This is not the most efficient way of making a cooler. For those that wonder what happened to the second law of thermodynamics. From TC's thesis: "The Clausius Statment of the 2nd law of thermodynamics reads: It is impossible to construct a system which will operate in a cycle and transfer heat from a cooler body to a hotter body without work being done on the system by the surroundings." He then proceeds to show that the system MUST include the compressor, and the you have a cycle where the compressed air is used to establish the rotating vortex and you can get cooler air on one side and hotter air from the other at atmospheric pressure. The inlet to the compressor closes the loop by sucking the air back from the atmosphere and keeping this going. So no laws are broken but if you have a way to efficiently make compressed something without electricity, then it should be a lot more efficient to run an expansion valve like a regular refrigerator. If you have to burn paraffin (or kerosene) then use a regular paraffin or kerosene refrigerator. Those have been around for ages.
I guess you don't feel the irony uh? To me it _IS_ pretty ironic that MS did not receive any penalty while Standard Oil did. I guess we have different definitions of the term, or maybe I should not be writing ironic comments in \.
It doesn't look too drastic. What it says is that everyone licensing under the GPL allows everyone else to defend themselves against lawsuits due to Patent or other IP related lawsuits by revoking their right to a license under the GPL. Essentially u sue us we take our ball and go home. http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/09/06/fsf_patent _gpl/
If they start using illegal means to do that then they may get stuck with being labeled a monopoly and broken down. The US does not tolerate that behavior from anyone, look at what happened to Standard Oil? (So you feel the irony?)
Well they still have the processes. A lot of the company's doing the outsourcing work in India are Indian. The know how belongs to Indian's not americans. That makes it potentially easier for them to hold on to their work because they have more than just cheap wages. If that was the case then it would be very easy to outsource to say Ethiopia. Eastern Europe has some advantages but it is not clear to me that wages make _that_ much of a difference.