What I find offensive is the implied lack of respect for science in an 'artistic' context. The writers don't care to engage those with a modicum of scientific literacy. While it takes some effort for them to become educated in scientific principles, it seems like a tiny investment compared to endless millions invested in SFX, marketing and the rest of the blah blah.
Conversely, I also respect science more that expresses itself with an aesthetic sensibility as well.
If it is an impact, then what else is there to compare it to? According to the blogger, there was no sign whatever of the event just 2 days earlier. Can a storm arise that quickly out of nothing? In any case, it seems likely that they will soon be able to determine if it is an impact or not.
I don't know why this is modded flamebait - it's constructive criticism and trying to make sense of an incoherent assertion. Does the original poster think it's "not wise to get any Valve game" for the PC?
On the other hand I sympathize with the parent. It's hard to write anything comprehensible in under a minute!
I had to reply to this thread, seeing only 9 hidden comments so far. That's a bit sad, since the JWST will be one of the most important science events since the Hubble. It will be an infrared telescope like the Spitzer, but it will effectively be an optical telescope for the distant universe because of red shift! And it will be able to peer into the distant past unlike any telescope prior.
In the sense of being a "space race" this is one area where the US really shines. There's no other nation that really is in the running, although there are lots of international contributions (yay Canada!). Maybe it's because of the language barrier, but I can't think of a single Russian space telescope. I can name a half dozen US scopes and one or two from the ESA. (Be sure to look up the Chandra, Fermi, Spitzer, XMM-Newton)
But then it's not really a space race, it's about science, so maybe it's a little boring for the general public. I only hope Slashdotter's are more aware that this is one of the great scientific adventures of our time.
Asteroids... have considerably more scientific value than the moon.
That's debatable, but to the extent it is true we should be sending unmanned probes to the asteroids, not expensive manned missions. Besides, manned missions really don't have much to do with science.
The moon is much more like Mars than any little near Earth asteroid. Before we go to Mars we'll need to learn how to live there for several months, and constructing a base on the moon is a great way to gain that knowledge. It's far enough away and a similar enough environment to require similar engineering solutions, but near enough to rescue the mission if something goes awry. Also, landing on and lifting off the Moon is just what we want to be good at for a manned Mars mission. The moon's gravity is about 1/6 earth, Mar's is about 1/4. The main difference is Mar's atmosphere, but we won't learn anything about landing on an atmosphered planet from an asteroid mission.
Personally I think going to Mars is going to be a hell of a tough prospect, much harder than most people think. I can imagine a future where the first successful two-year mission barely survives the ordeal and the bleakness and suffering of the explorers turns everyone off the whole idea. Probably what we need is a faster, better, cheaper propulsion system to get us there in a month or less.
As compared to what? The Large Hadron Collider? The Supercollider? How about the Titanic or the Great Wall of China?
I happen to like these names. This is astronomy. The study of very large, huge, colossal, inconceivably gigantic structures and scales. It's very much like the exponential growth in the size of electronic storage devices. I get a similar feeling when I ponder these concepts.
If you follow the development of modern telescopes, they are in fact quite descriptive, in a relative way. If you're interested enough to know how big they are, just go to their web site to find the information you want. After all, this is the 21st century, man.
This reminds me of a bad dream I once had. I walked into a room full of people and looked down to discover my trackpads were disabled. I was mortified I tell you.
I would moderate this insightful but I don't want to waste my points on an AC (I just did that with my very first mod point).
Privacy laws are important, but they should apply to private contexts, not necessarily public spaces. If people want to maintain their privacy, they shouldn't go out in public. If they want to maintain anonymity they can wear sunglasses and a head scarf, or a fake moustache.
I haven't quite made up my mind about this particular issue. I do think private individuals should be allowed to take photos in public places for personal use, but I'm not sure about corporations publishing images indefinitely for profit.
http://www.shelleytherepublican.com/2006/04/20/lin ux-a-european-threat-to-our-computers-by-tristan.a spx
If you see a company using Linux, it may be that they have not paid for this software. Report them to the Business Software Alliance who have the legal authority to inspect any company's computers for illegal programs like Linux. This is one of the most bizarre links I've ever visited in my life. Please tell me it's a parody. Please! Please?
I agree that a probablistic survey using a lot of people can be valuable. Two or more heads are better than one kind of thing.
I tend to identify blobby ellipticals with internal structure as edge-on spirals, even though I can't tell their rotation. Especially if the image is not too pixelated or jpeg-artifacted.
I think a lot of the images are red because they are red-shifted.
So if George W creates a scam on his part to make people believe, and taunts the world community, he deserves to have his country leveled?
This is the logic of the NeoCons.
Rebates are a hassle indeed.
Let me relate my experience with rebates. I once sent in a rebate for a CD drive, eventually forgetting all about it a few months later. Over a year passed by and I finally got a letter informing me that my rebate had been mailed in a few days late.
The other case was equally absurd. In this instance I received a letter stating I had sent in the rebate too early.
The last time I submitted one, I looked at the submission time limits on the form and there were two different dates. I highlighted both dates and mailed it in before both dates. To my surprise I got the $20 in the mail.
If I had any other choice, I would avoid rebates. They are at least as sinister as I think.
Slashdot Mirror
How about now? How about now? How about now? ...
What I find offensive is the implied lack of respect for science in an 'artistic' context. The writers don't care to engage those with a modicum of scientific literacy. While it takes some effort for them to become educated in scientific principles, it seems like a tiny investment compared to endless millions invested in SFX, marketing and the rest of the blah blah.
Conversely, I also respect science more that expresses itself with an aesthetic sensibility as well.
If it is an impact, then what else is there to compare it to? According to the blogger, there was no sign whatever of the event just 2 days earlier. Can a storm arise that quickly out of nothing? In any case, it seems likely that they will soon be able to determine if it is an impact or not.
It just struck me as funny how there's a loss or corruption of information about lossless jpeg format.
On the other hand I sympathize with the parent. It's hard to write anything comprehensible in under a minute!
I had to reply to this thread, seeing only 9 hidden comments so far. That's a bit sad, since the JWST will be one of the most important science events since the Hubble. It will be an infrared telescope like the Spitzer, but it will effectively be an optical telescope for the distant universe because of red shift! And it will be able to peer into the distant past unlike any telescope prior.
In the sense of being a "space race" this is one area where the US really shines. There's no other nation that really is in the running, although there are lots of international contributions (yay Canada!). Maybe it's because of the language barrier, but I can't think of a single Russian space telescope. I can name a half dozen US scopes and one or two from the ESA. (Be sure to look up the Chandra, Fermi, Spitzer, XMM-Newton)
But then it's not really a space race, it's about science, so maybe it's a little boring for the general public. I only hope Slashdotter's are more aware that this is one of the great scientific adventures of our time.
That's debatable, but to the extent it is true we should be sending unmanned probes to the asteroids, not expensive manned missions. Besides, manned missions really don't have much to do with science.
The moon is much more like Mars than any little near Earth asteroid. Before we go to Mars we'll need to learn how to live there for several months, and constructing a base on the moon is a great way to gain that knowledge. It's far enough away and a similar enough environment to require similar engineering solutions, but near enough to rescue the mission if something goes awry. Also, landing on and lifting off the Moon is just what we want to be good at for a manned Mars mission. The moon's gravity is about 1/6 earth, Mar's is about 1/4. The main difference is Mar's atmosphere, but we won't learn anything about landing on an atmosphered planet from an asteroid mission.
Personally I think going to Mars is going to be a hell of a tough prospect, much harder than most people think. I can imagine a future where the first successful two-year mission barely survives the ordeal and the bleakness and suffering of the explorers turns everyone off the whole idea. Probably what we need is a faster, better, cheaper propulsion system to get us there in a month or less.
... raising the rate to 256 millibits per second isn't going to help.
Sure you would - a nice steady thump about every 4 seconds!
I happen to like these names. This is astronomy. The study of very large, huge, colossal, inconceivably gigantic structures and scales. It's very much like the exponential growth in the size of electronic storage devices. I get a similar feeling when I ponder these concepts.
If you follow the development of modern telescopes, they are in fact quite descriptive, in a relative way. If you're interested enough to know how big they are, just go to their web site to find the information you want. After all, this is the 21st century, man.
This reminds me of a bad dream I once had. I walked into a room full of people and looked down to discover my trackpads were disabled. I was mortified I tell you.
Indulge me:
Killing thousands of innocent civilians for the next 6 years while failing to bring justice to the perpetrators is utter madness.
I would moderate this insightful but I don't want to waste my points on an AC (I just did that with my very first mod point).
Privacy laws are important, but they should apply to private contexts, not necessarily public spaces. If people want to maintain their privacy, they shouldn't go out in public. If they want to maintain anonymity they can wear sunglasses and a head scarf, or a fake moustache.
I haven't quite made up my mind about this particular issue. I do think private individuals should be allowed to take photos in public places for personal use, but I'm not sure about corporations publishing images indefinitely for profit.
I agree that a probablistic survey using a lot of people can be valuable. Two or more heads are better than one kind of thing. I tend to identify blobby ellipticals with internal structure as edge-on spirals, even though I can't tell their rotation. Especially if the image is not too pixelated or jpeg-artifacted.
I think a lot of the images are red because they are red-shifted.
So if George W creates a scam on his part to make people believe, and taunts the world community, he deserves to have his country leveled? This is the logic of the NeoCons.
Rebates are a hassle indeed.
Let me relate my experience with rebates. I once sent in a rebate for a CD drive, eventually forgetting all about it a few months later. Over a year passed by and I finally got a letter informing me that my rebate had been mailed in a few days late.
The other case was equally absurd. In this instance I received a letter stating I had sent in the rebate too early.
The last time I submitted one, I looked at the submission time limits on the form and there were two different dates. I highlighted both dates and mailed it in before both dates. To my surprise I got the $20 in the mail.
If I had any other choice, I would avoid rebates. They are at least as sinister as I think.