Fortunately, I'm good enough at discerning context that I understood what you meant by "There for" and "What was the article talking about, finding something in the galaxy." (a rhetorical question gone statement?)
Man, nobody understands grammar any more.
Hell no.
They should patent the design and accrue all the royalties they can. I think they've earned it; whats more is that if they release the design under a free licence, automotive corporations will just capitalise on it anyway.
I don't get what that site is trying to say. If I was looking for a certain web service, I might consider querying google.com, which I notice isn't listed in TFA (google maps/local is, but not the search engine). Nor is wikipedia, which could fit quite congruously under the Start pages section, or even a section of its own.
It is interesting however to consider that "To some extent Web 2.0 has become a buzzword, incorporating whatever is newly popular on the Web" -From wikipedia's definition
In some regards this is true; there are certain material shields that can deflect cosmic radiation. Water and polyethylene are two examples. For water to be effective, it would have to be 5 meters deep (according to the SciAm article). This would make the payload of any prospective water-encapsulated spacecraft VERY massive.
Keep in mind that this "shield" is not deflecting space rocks, we're talking about elementary particles traveling at immense speeds, which decompose into gamma radiation upon collision with other particles, in addition to damaging the impacted particle. This can cause loss of molecular integrety in your DNA (i.e. splitting it). You don't have to know much to realize this isn't a good thing.
However, there are other ways of deflecting the cosmic radiation. One such proposed method employs electromagnets. The problem is that the magnet would have to be powerful on the order of 20 Teslas. To give a sense of scale, this is about 400000x the earth's magnetic field. Not only would such an electromagnet consume a LOT of power, its biological effects on astronauts within its field are uncertain.
Another way is to positively charge the spacecraft, but this is also impractical. The power consumption rates are outrageous, plus it would attract a massive flux of surrounding negatively charged particles, which can do as much, if not more, damage as the original particles that you're deflecting.
The point is, until there is a feasible means of shielding these prospective interplanetary adventurers (I woudn't venture to assert that launching a 500 ton water shield is practical), it doesn't matter how advanced our rockets are, because we're not going to get very far without significant biological damage.
Perhaps he should invest in some cosmic shielding research. I was just reading an article eariler today in the current issue of Scientific American that you could end up reaching Mars with severe DNA and brain damage. The obstacles do not lie in the innovation of rockets, but in protecting the traveler.
DS Linux is a perfect example of another linux distro that runs on flash alone. As for *limited* rights, its something like >5x10^6 writes to the card isn't it? I don't really know how that compares to the amount of r/w's a typical computer performs over a given amount of time, but it sounds like a lot to me. Also, with prices on flash memory falling as they are, it likely won't be a big deal to replace the card once you've expended your 5 mil writes.
Slashdot Mirror
Fortunately, I'm good enough at discerning context that I understood what you meant by "There for" and "What was the article talking about, finding something in the galaxy." (a rhetorical question gone statement?) Man, nobody understands grammar any more.
It's ironic that Israel said that Amazon "dosn't get blogging" when "the guy himself" has a blog.
This project stemmed the GMail Drive shell extension, which effectivly intergrates the same method of using gmail's storage into Windows.
Hell no.
They should patent the design and accrue all the royalties they can. I think they've earned it; whats more is that if they release the design under a free licence, automotive corporations will just capitalise on it anyway.
It is interesting however to consider that "To some extent Web 2.0 has become a buzzword, incorporating whatever is newly popular on the Web" -From wikipedia's definition
Keep in mind that this "shield" is not deflecting space rocks, we're talking about elementary particles traveling at immense speeds, which decompose into gamma radiation upon collision with other particles, in addition to damaging the impacted particle. This can cause loss of molecular integrety in your DNA (i.e. splitting it). You don't have to know much to realize this isn't a good thing.
However, there are other ways of deflecting the cosmic radiation. One such proposed method employs electromagnets. The problem is that the magnet would have to be powerful on the order of 20 Teslas. To give a sense of scale, this is about 400000x the earth's magnetic field. Not only would such an electromagnet consume a LOT of power, its biological effects on astronauts within its field are uncertain.
Another way is to positively charge the spacecraft, but this is also impractical. The power consumption rates are outrageous, plus it would attract a massive flux of surrounding negatively charged particles, which can do as much, if not more, damage as the original particles that you're deflecting.
The point is, until there is a feasible means of shielding these prospective interplanetary adventurers (I woudn't venture to assert that launching a 500 ton water shield is practical), it doesn't matter how advanced our rockets are, because we're not going to get very far without significant biological damage.
Perhaps he should invest in some cosmic shielding research. I was just reading an article eariler today in the current issue of Scientific American that you could end up reaching Mars with severe DNA and brain damage. The obstacles do not lie in the innovation of rockets, but in protecting the traveler.
DS Linux is a perfect example of another linux distro that runs on flash alone.
As for *limited* rights, its something like >5x10^6 writes to the card isn't it? I don't really know how that compares to the amount of r/w's a typical computer performs over a given amount of time, but it sounds like a lot to me. Also, with prices on flash memory falling as they are, it likely won't be a big deal to replace the card once you've expended your 5 mil writes.
Interesting that they're researching birth proliferation in China...
I thought they were more or less set population-wise