yep - just a little overrated. Objects in low earth orbit have 32.1 to 38.6 MJ/kg energy. Assuming that the collision between 2 1000kg satellites leaves 1/2 the energy left over, there's potentially 3.8e10J of energy. 1g of TNT is defined as 4184J therefore the left over energy is equal to 9.2T of tnt, minus what is lost as objects pass through the atmosphere, what was used to break the satellite up, etc...
To put this into scale, if all this energy was to go off at one point in an earthquake, to cause the rumblings in TFA, it would be around mangitude 2.7 or so, of which there are about a thousand per day and are generally not felt.
This is discounting that the satellite broke into quite a few pieces which will gradually enter the atmosphere over the next while.
Intel had a Fourth-Quarter Revenue of $10.7 Billion , so it isn't quite an insignificant amount, but if it were to completely disappear it wouldn't be a catastrophic problem.
when company B is becoming a major competitor to A in several key areas you don't often see A give B a nice advantage in terms of functionality and compatibility.
because all modifications to the object are done by manipulations of the the OS stored object if the program barfs, either the last call to modify object was executed, and the object was modified by the OS, or the program died before object.change() was called, in which case the object is still perfectly in the old state.
Because the OS actually holds the object itself the only manipulation of it not actually saved will be the single action which caused the crash.
The current paradigm is: 1) user creates new file 2) user types "have a nice day"
2a) as each letter is typed the internal memory buffer is updated 3) user saves
3a) internal memory buffer is passed to os.file.write
3a) OS writes "have a nice day" to the file
The paradigm here is 1) user creates a new file
1a) os passes program file.handle 2) user types "have a nice day"
2a) as each letter is typed file.handle.addData() is called 3) the user does not save ever 3a) at appropriate times the OS synchronises the version of file in its memory and on disk.
The difference if program crashes at any time is large
2b) the program crashes after the 2nd 'a' is typed.
original paradigm: the file is left empty, and the programs internal memory buffer is lost
with phantom: OS.file.data is "have a", which at an appropriate time gets written to disk, and is available for editing to continue after a handle to that document is retrieved again.
err, no. this technology would allow 2 bits to be stored in the place of 1 bit, doubling capacity. So your 1GB disk would become a 2GB disk, with extra expensive funky read heads.
i think that given the criticism towards windows it would be more appropriate to say "having install a version of linux, thank god that i can install the bits i missed without forking out another $200".
At times i think that it is more appropriate to think of linux as a generic brand with fedora, ubuntu, gentoo... being the actual operating systems, which just happen to be quite closely related. (it isn't much use going to a ubuntu channel looking for "linux" help if you installed gentoo (well most of the time anyway) )
what is p(blackhole=1 | expert opinion, expert = wrong)
if p(blackhole | expert opinion)=.05 and the opinion is wrong, then all we know is that the p is not 0.05 .
It could be 0, it could be 1. Given that experts tend to be roughly right, a resonable estimate would be that it is quite a bit closer to 0 than 1.
An expert being wrong, doesn't say in which direction he is wrong.
Even if you know an expert is wrong 50% of the time, his estimate is still a good mean value, its just that you don't know how close the actual solution is to it.
There is probably a distribution of error -- |p(expert_option) -p(blackhole)| is probably quite small; ie, an expert is more likely to be a little bit wrong than a large amount wrong.
what it means is that there is somewhere between a 1:2*10^20 and 50% chance that the earth would be destroyed, however all we know is the mean estimate (1:10^20) and not where the true value lies, within the extremely large range of possible values. even though there's only a 50% chance of being right most people creating an estimate are likely to be in the ball-park of the correct value (+- 5 orders of magnitude) so even if there is little chance of being exactly right, there is a good chance of being roughly right.
Some of the discussions within these threads here are mixing the mean value of estimates and the variance in that estimate.
I've purchased all my valve games irrispective of steam simply because they are good games, worth the money you pay for them, and i want to support the company that made them.
Perhaps valve's secret to not having a large amount of piracy was to charge $20 for portal, and $80 for the orange box, both of which were easly worth that money. Another company would of said "portal is popular, $80 if you want it", at which point a significant group of people would say "i'm not paying $80 for a 4 hour game" and go pirate it.
I do download games from time to time, but anything which manages to keep my attention beyond the first few times i play it, i pay for.
what a thread : funny, Offtopic by Anonymous Coward, Offtopic, Offtopic, Offtopic, Offtopic, Offtopic,(Score:0 by Anonymous Coward),Troll by Anonymous Coward, Redundant,(Score:0 by Anonymous Coward),Insightful by mweather, (Score:1),Interesting by TerranFury, informative by DrPizza.
What a comeback to that final informative, I guess there is hope for/. after all.
ah, but my 15 extensions worth of bloat is quite different to yours (except for noscript and addblock, probably). Since we both just get the features we want, is it rely bloat, which tends to be defined as extraneous and vaguely useful features that have been hanging around for a while.
non-volatile memory can be read dozens of writes back.
[citation needed]
seriously, i would interested in reading a paper where people have managed to do this - the closest thing to "dozens of writes" back that i know of is noting that different OS's had been installed, due to different formatting patterns, but i don't remember seeing anyone reporting the ability to extract that level of info from any hard drive.
i believe the main problem associated with these ridiculously large storage capacities is that the exponential growth of storage capacity has been faster than the exponential growth of bandwidth.
1.5TB is the largest hard drive that isn't overly expensive, which (at the 1.9Mb/s bandwidth which is the median internet speed in America, is 76.6 days. Even in Japan (with a median of 61Mb/s) it takes 58 hours.
20 years ago with a 56k dialup and a 300MB hard drive it would only take 12 hours to copy it.
640k may be enough, but only if not many people talk about it. I think that some sets of comments here on/. could end up being > 640k -- the 36 comments that this page is up to take 112k.
be fair - they don't shoot at everyone who moves, they will only shoot at black cars, because we all have been taught that bad guys in movies drive black cars.
Slashdot Mirror
yes, its the golden rule - he who has the gold, makes the rules
yep - just a little overrated.
Objects in low earth orbit have 32.1 to 38.6 MJ/kg energy. Assuming that the collision between 2 1000kg satellites leaves 1/2 the energy left over, there's potentially 3.8e10J of energy. 1g of TNT is defined as 4184J therefore the left over energy is equal to 9.2T of tnt, minus what is lost as objects pass through the atmosphere, what was used to break the satellite up, etc...
To put this into scale, if all this energy was to go off at one point in an earthquake, to cause the rumblings in TFA, it would be around mangitude 2.7 or so, of which there are about a thousand per day and are generally not felt.
This is discounting that the satellite broke into quite a few pieces which will gradually enter the atmosphere over the next while.
by Anonymous Coward February 12,
My name is "XYZ".
are you sure about that?
Intel had a Fourth-Quarter Revenue of $10.7 Billion , so it isn't quite an insignificant amount, but if it were to completely disappear it wouldn't be a catastrophic problem.
perhaps even informative?
when company B is becoming a major competitor to A in several key areas you don't often see A give B a nice advantage in terms of functionality and compatibility.
is the current problem the hurricane or the windy day?
because all modifications to the object are done by manipulations of the the OS stored object if the program barfs, either the last call to modify object was executed, and the object was modified by the OS, or the program died before object.change() was called, in which case the object is still perfectly in the old state.
Because the OS actually holds the object itself the only manipulation of it not actually saved will be the single action which caused the crash.
The current paradigm is:
1) user creates new file
2) user types "have a nice day"
2a) as each letter is typed the internal memory buffer is updated
3) user saves
3a) internal memory buffer is passed to os.file.write
3a) OS writes "have a nice day" to the file
The paradigm here is
1) user creates a new file
1a) os passes program file.handle
2) user types "have a nice day"
2a) as each letter is typed file.handle.addData() is called
3) the user does not save ever
3a) at appropriate times the OS synchronises the version of file in its memory and on disk.
The difference if program crashes at any time is large
2b) the program crashes after the 2nd 'a' is typed.
original paradigm:
the file is left empty, and the programs internal memory buffer is lost
with phantom:
OS.file.data is "have a", which at an appropriate time gets written to disk, and is available for editing to continue after a handle to that document is retrieved again.
err, no. this technology would allow 2 bits to be stored in the place of 1 bit, doubling capacity.
So your 1GB disk would become a 2GB disk, with extra expensive funky read heads.
neither rfc 1149, nor rfc 2549 mention this "feed" -- is this a non-standard implementation?
i think that given the criticism towards windows it would be more appropriate to say "having install a version of linux, thank god that i can install the bits i missed without forking out another $200".
At times i think that it is more appropriate to think of linux as a generic brand with fedora, ubuntu, gentoo ... being the actual operating systems, which just happen to be quite closely related. (it isn't much use going to a ubuntu channel looking for "linux" help if you installed gentoo (well most of the time anyway) )
what is p(blackhole=1 | expert opinion, expert = wrong)
if p(blackhole | expert opinion)=.05
and the opinion is wrong, then all we know is that the p is not 0.05 .
It could be 0, it could be 1. Given that experts tend to be roughly right, a resonable estimate would be that it is quite a bit closer to 0 than 1.
An expert being wrong, doesn't say in which direction he is wrong.
Even if you know an expert is wrong 50% of the time, his estimate is still a good mean value, its just that you don't know how close the actual solution is to it.
There is probably a distribution of error -- |p(expert_option) -p(blackhole)| is probably quite small; ie, an expert is more likely to be a little bit wrong than a large amount wrong.
what it means is that there is somewhere between a 1:2*10^20 and 50% chance that the earth would be destroyed, however all we know is the mean estimate (1:10^20) and not where the true value lies, within the extremely large range of possible values.
even though there's only a 50% chance of being right most people creating an estimate are likely to be in the ball-park of the correct value (+- 5 orders of magnitude) so even if there is little chance of being exactly right, there is a good chance of being roughly right.
Some of the discussions within these threads here are mixing the mean value of estimates and the variance in that estimate.
he probably wants to make a neat gun
for the people who are still alive.
I've purchased all my valve games irrispective of steam simply because they are good games, worth the money you pay for them, and i want to support the company that made them.
Perhaps valve's secret to not having a large amount of piracy was to charge $20 for portal, and $80 for the orange box, both of which were easly worth that money. Another company would of said "portal is popular, $80 if you want it", at which point a significant group of people would say "i'm not paying $80 for a 4 hour game" and go pirate it.
I do download games from time to time, but anything which manages to keep my attention beyond the first few times i play it, i pay for.
"All it would take is one false positive or false negative before no one would trust it again."
would you be able to tell me which of the currently used security products are trusted, due to never throwing a false positive or negative?
dell inspiron 640m, with onboard graphics only ... (I use matlab on here regularly, does that count as a calculator?)
what a thread : funny, Offtopic by Anonymous Coward, Offtopic, Offtopic, Offtopic, Offtopic, Offtopic,(Score:0 by Anonymous Coward),Troll by Anonymous Coward, Redundant,(Score:0 by Anonymous Coward),Insightful by mweather, (Score:1),Interesting by TerranFury, informative by DrPizza.
What a comeback to that final informative, I guess there is hope for /. after all.
ah, but my 15 extensions worth of bloat is quite different to yours (except for noscript and addblock, probably). Since we both just get the features we want, is it rely bloat, which tends to be defined as extraneous and vaguely useful features that have been hanging around for a while.
fortunately the localisation error on a "slow" moving macroscopic object is a small fraction of the width of an atom.
I suspect that there are larger sources of error within the system.
non-volatile memory can be read dozens of writes back.
[citation needed]
seriously, i would interested in reading a paper where people have managed to do this - the closest thing to "dozens of writes" back that i know of is noting that different OS's had been installed, due to different formatting patterns, but i don't remember seeing anyone reporting the ability to extract that level of info from any hard drive.
i believe the main problem associated with these ridiculously large storage capacities is that the exponential growth of storage capacity has been faster than the exponential growth of bandwidth.
1.5TB is the largest hard drive that isn't overly expensive, which (at the 1.9Mb/s bandwidth which is the median internet speed in America, is 76.6 days. Even in Japan (with a median of 61Mb/s) it takes 58 hours.
20 years ago with a 56k dialup and a 300MB hard drive it would only take 12 hours to copy it.
(hard drive capacity from http://www.pcguide.com/ref/hdd/hist-c.html , http://www.speedmatters.org/document-library/sourcematerials/sm_report.pdf , http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modem and a few other places for an estimate of connection speed, i might be a little high for the historical estimate here)
I don't see this situation improving any time soon.
640k may be enough, but only if not many people talk about it. /. could end up being > 640k -- the 36 comments that this page is up to take 112k.
I think that some sets of comments here on
all evidence has some *finite* weight, besides 10,000 lemmings can't be wrong ....
be fair - they don't shoot at everyone who moves, they will only shoot at black cars, because we all have been taught that bad guys in movies drive black cars.