>I said nothing about resolution giving proof. My point was that if there was
>something there of interest, someone would have at least attempted to photograph
>it and would have something to show for it -- very likely a crappy photo, yes,
>but at least something to show.
"I think Bigfoot is blurry, that's the problem. It's not the photographer's fault. Bigfoot is blurry. And that's extra scary to me, because there's a large, out-of-focus monster roaming the countryside."
- Mitch Hedberg
Uncounted numbers of rockets over many centuries have flown without any sort of feedback control system. If the CG is sufficiently forward of the CP, there you go. No feedback control system necessary.
>An amateurer rocket designer today can buy off the shelf parts - and know exactly what their tolerances are.
These aren't off-the-shelf parts. There are some M motors in commercial production, but motors in this class are often custom built. (usually because the commercial motors are very expensive and sometimes difficult to obtain)
Many of the parts aren't even intended for rocketry use, so you often don't know what the tolerances are. If you do, they're usually written for some other industry in mind.
Anyone poo-pooing this attempt as being simple needs to get off their duff and earn their L3 certification.
Don't confuse this with model rocketry techniques.
Clustering can be tricky, but I see no reason they can't pull this off. I'm guessing the motors have their launch electronics on-board in case one doesn't come up to pressure by the time it wants to leave the pad.
Also, rods aren't used (or at least shouldn't be) at this level. Rails are far better. Some clubs are banning rods completely for anything over a G.
No. It's not even close to a "cruise missle".
Cruise missiles have horizontal flight capability. This has none (at least not for very long).
Cruise missiles have an active guidance system. This has none.
The number and size of parachutes aren't relevant. Large high-power models often use large parachutes.
GPS is old hat. They're commonly flown in rocketry today, but strictly as a device to relay location, not to do any sort of craft guidance.
The FAA requires clearance over a certain altitude. The ATF is always trying to regulate the hobby industry. Commerical M-size motors pretty much require a LEUP (Low Explosives User Permit). Tripoli and NAR both require L3 certification to burn motors of this size.
Don't worry about somebody not knowing this thing is going to fly.
>While I applaud the effort, I have a bad feeling about this. If one of the four solid >rocket motors fails to ignite or ignites early/late, you're going to have a 22 foot >(or more) long pile of scrap wood and aluminum.
That happens all the time with regular high-power rockets.
It looks perfectly flight-worthy. Model X-Wings have been flown ever since Star Wars came out. They've been getting larger ever since.
The only thing that seems to be pushing the edge is having the wings unfold during flight. I'd imagine the builders must be pretty confident in their clustering ability to attempt that.
I can't see any real application for this in a data center. They'll always use wires, switches, and routers.
One simple reason is that one bad wireless transmitter could jam a whole bunch of nearby servers, which probably wouldn't be good.
Wires have their uses. Sometimes it's good to keep your data flow contained and controlled.
a) They've had all the latest tech thrown at them b) They've had a ton of money thrown at them c) The teachers were just better paid and motivated d) They have a fanatical tech support team coporately motivated
The only "win" I can see is a Microsoft marketing stunt. They'll be able to truthfully say all of their "graduates" have at least applied for college. Anybody else will be swept under the rug.
>In college we had palm scanners just to get into the student
>recreation center. There was a rumor flying about that they
>could be beaten by scanning the back of your hand instead of
>the palm. Turned out to not be true.
It could have been true. Years ago I used to admin a few hand geometry readers (they really didn't scan your palm). If you loosened up the parameters enough, it would accept most anything...even the back of my left hand.
Often the only "real" security on those systems was the PIN code. The use of the hand was just for show.
>Accepting this then, the only truly safe way to compute today is to keep your > boot/OS/application drive from being writable. Baring this, the next best >step is to re-image your drive from non-writable media daily.
You'd certainly get a blank stare from me.
That's not very practical. Depending on your OS and partioning scheme, you would be losing logs, patches, and preferences with each re-image.
A better approach is to start with a clean system, run something like tripwire, and keep an eye out for unusual changes.
Gee...only one storm. That proves global warming is true!;)
Assignment: Please link these historical events to an overly-warm climate.
1606 From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Events
January 27 - Gunpowder Plot: The trial of Guy Fawkes and other conspirators begins.
January 31 - Guy Fawkes is executed for his plotting against Parliament and James I of England.
April 12 - The Union Jack is adopted as the national flag of Great Britain.
May 17 - Supporters of Vasili Shusky invade the Kremlin and kill Premier Dmitri.
December 26 - Shakespeare's King Lear performed in court.
Storm buries a village of St Ishmail near modern-day Kidwelly, Carmarthenshire, Britain.
The Treaty of Zsitva-Torok ends the Long War between the Habsburgs and the Ottomans in Hungary. The independence of Transylvania is recognized by both sides and Austria's annual tribute to the Ottoman Empire is abolished.
First Union Flag created.
The Jesuit Joannis Stribingius visits Latvia, describes Latvian mythology.
I signed up for AOL on a whim in March just to see what it was like since I left many years ago (I was one of the original Mac users so early that I could use my initials as a screen name).
I didn't think much of it, so I decided to cancel last month. They will only let you cancel by phone, paper mail, or fax.
I decided to do fax, since I thought that would be the easiest. Apparently it didn't work, as I still got a bill on my credit card this month.
So, this article spurred me to try to cancel by phone.
I had to spend a few minutes talking to a machine...that actually wasn't a bad system. However, once I wanted to cancel, it put me on hold and said I'd have to wait about 10 minutes.
So, I was listening to Carly Simon for what seemed forever (I'd estimate about 6 minutes, since I heard two songs), and finally got a human. I was being given the hard sell much like this article, but it was clear the poor guy was being forced to read from the "script" and wasn't having much fun doing it, so I played along just to be polite.
That conversation lasted about 3 minutes. Then he said he had to read some cancellation disclosure and "not to shoot the messenger". The disclosure said that AOL would let me retain my email address for free just to maintain a relationship. No catch. They will send me a confirmation to my AOL address and by US Mail. Interesting.
After that, he said he needed to transfer for another disclosure and to verify important details. The phone began to ring, and ring, and ring....it finally went dead. (I hope this doesn't mean my account isn't going to be cancelled...guess I'll have to check that email address)
>point to a single result coming from the shuttle program that was >worth a human life?
The needs of the many outweigh the needs of a few. Sacrifice if part of exploration. Mountain climers willing sacrifice their lives and body parts just to climb that mountain. What good result comes from that?
Just use google to find successful shuttle experiments. As is typical in science, most experiments are failures. Very few result in something as dramatic as directly saving human lives. However, the failures also teach us what doesn't work. So in the long run we gain either way.
Could some of the projects be automated? Probably. But a human brain can think its way out of a jam better than any machine we hope to produce in the near future. Humans are creative, and can excel where machines fail.
To sum up, lots of people are willing to risk life and limb to explore...it's part of being human. Advances in knowledge usually come in small jumps...and who knows what seemingly trivial experiment might result in an earth-shattering technology?
Human safety is important. Part of space exploration is to make space safer for everyone. That alone can justify a space program.
>I certainly hope that Apple doesn't buy nintendo (even if they could) because >the reason nintendo are great is because the concentrate on games, games, games. >No failed computer / pda / music player / whatever for them. They just concentrate >on what they're good at.
Nintendo *HAS* failed at non-game endevors...a taxi company, vacuum cleaners, etc. The company is well over 100 years old. They've had their share of going down blind alleys.
Slashdot Mirror
>I said nothing about resolution giving proof. My point was that if there was >something there of interest, someone would have at least attempted to photograph >it and would have something to show for it -- very likely a crappy photo, yes, >but at least something to show. "I think Bigfoot is blurry, that's the problem. It's not the photographer's fault. Bigfoot is blurry. And that's extra scary to me, because there's a large, out-of-focus monster roaming the countryside." - Mitch Hedberg
Uncounted numbers of rockets over many centuries have flown without any sort of feedback control system. If the CG is sufficiently forward of the CP, there you go. No feedback control system necessary.
>An amateurer rocket designer today can buy off the shelf parts - and know exactly what their tolerances are.
These aren't off-the-shelf parts. There are some M motors in commercial production, but motors in this class are often custom built. (usually because the commercial motors are very expensive and sometimes difficult to obtain)
Many of the parts aren't even intended for rocketry use, so you often don't know what the tolerances are. If you do, they're usually written for some other industry in mind.
Anyone poo-pooing this attempt as being simple needs to get off their duff and earn their L3 certification.
But shreds are not uncommon in high power rocketry.
I'm sure they'll learn from the failure and build another one until they get it right.
That's pretty much the whole point of the hobby. If you don't have the occasional spectacular failure, you're probably not innovating enough.
Don't confuse this with model rocketry techniques. Clustering can be tricky, but I see no reason they can't pull this off. I'm guessing the motors have their launch electronics on-board in case one doesn't come up to pressure by the time it wants to leave the pad. Also, rods aren't used (or at least shouldn't be) at this level. Rails are far better. Some clubs are banning rods completely for anything over a G.
No. It's not even close to a "cruise missle". Cruise missiles have horizontal flight capability. This has none (at least not for very long). Cruise missiles have an active guidance system. This has none. The number and size of parachutes aren't relevant. Large high-power models often use large parachutes. GPS is old hat. They're commonly flown in rocketry today, but strictly as a device to relay location, not to do any sort of craft guidance. The FAA requires clearance over a certain altitude. The ATF is always trying to regulate the hobby industry. Commerical M-size motors pretty much require a LEUP (Low Explosives User Permit). Tripoli and NAR both require L3 certification to burn motors of this size. Don't worry about somebody not knowing this thing is going to fly.
There's no reason it can't fly. X-Wing rocket models have been flown for years, so the general idea is very sound.
>While I applaud the effort, I have a bad feeling about this. If one of the four solid
>rocket motors fails to ignite or ignites early/late, you're going to have a 22 foot
>(or more) long pile of scrap wood and aluminum.
That happens all the time with regular high-power rockets.
It looks perfectly flight-worthy. Model X-Wings have been flown ever since Star Wars came out. They've been getting larger ever since.
The only thing that seems to be pushing the edge is having the wings unfold during flight. I'd imagine the builders must be pretty confident in their clustering ability to attempt that.
I've used Rhapsody for years, but it's been really annoying that their DRM software doesn't support 64-bit Vista.
I can't see any real application for this in a data center. They'll always use wires, switches, and routers. One simple reason is that one bad wireless transmitter could jam a whole bunch of nearby servers, which probably wouldn't be good. Wires have their uses. Sometimes it's good to keep your data flow contained and controlled.
I'm sure what he's doing is adjusting for magnetic declination ;)
Let's assume the result is exceptional graduates.
Are the grads exceptional because:
a) They've had all the latest tech thrown at them
b) They've had a ton of money thrown at them
c) The teachers were just better paid and motivated
d) They have a fanatical tech support team coporately motivated
The only "win" I can see is a Microsoft marketing stunt. They'll be able to truthfully say all of their "graduates" have at least applied for college. Anybody else will be swept under the rug.
???
Dolphins don't jump out of their "water bowl" because they know it's a stupid thing to do. Aljazeera?
But what's a few orders of magnitude among friends?
>In college we had palm scanners just to get into the student >recreation center. There was a rumor flying about that they >could be beaten by scanning the back of your hand instead of >the palm. Turned out to not be true. It could have been true. Years ago I used to admin a few hand geometry readers (they really didn't scan your palm). If you loosened up the parameters enough, it would accept most anything...even the back of my left hand. Often the only "real" security on those systems was the PIN code. The use of the hand was just for show.
>Is that so hard? Sure. You could do that. But I don't think a copy machine is going to care.
That's just paranoia. It would be easier to track your cell phone.
>Couldn't they get all the same benefits with a simple barcode?
No. Barcodes are trivial to forge.
RFID forging would take much more effort.
>Accepting this then, the only truly safe way to compute today is to keep your
> boot/OS/application drive from being writable. Baring this, the next best
>step is to re-image your drive from non-writable media daily.
You'd certainly get a blank stare from me.
That's not very practical. Depending on your OS and partioning scheme, you would be losing logs, patches, and preferences with each re-image.
A better approach is to start with a clean system, run something like tripwire, and keep an eye out for unusual changes.
Gee...only one storm. That proves global warming is true! ;)
Assignment: Please link these historical events to an overly-warm climate.
1606
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Events
January 27 - Gunpowder Plot: The trial of Guy Fawkes and other conspirators begins.
January 31 - Guy Fawkes is executed for his plotting against Parliament and James I of England.
April 12 - The Union Jack is adopted as the national flag of Great Britain.
May 17 - Supporters of Vasili Shusky invade the Kremlin and kill Premier Dmitri.
December 26 - Shakespeare's King Lear performed in court.
Storm buries a village of St Ishmail near modern-day Kidwelly, Carmarthenshire, Britain.
The Treaty of Zsitva-Torok ends the Long War between the Habsburgs and the Ottomans in Hungary. The independence of Transylvania is recognized by both sides and Austria's annual tribute to the Ottoman Empire is abolished.
First Union Flag created.
The Jesuit Joannis Stribingius visits Latvia, describes Latvian mythology.
I signed up for AOL on a whim in March just to see what it was like since I left many years ago (I was one of the original Mac users so early that I could use my initials as a screen name).
I didn't think much of it, so I decided to cancel last month. They will only let you cancel by phone, paper mail, or fax.
I decided to do fax, since I thought that would be the easiest. Apparently it didn't work, as I still got a bill on my credit card this month.
So, this article spurred me to try to cancel by phone.
I had to spend a few minutes talking to a machine...that actually wasn't a bad system. However, once I wanted to cancel, it put me on hold and said I'd have to wait about 10 minutes.
So, I was listening to Carly Simon for what seemed forever (I'd estimate about 6 minutes, since I heard two songs), and finally got a human. I was being given the hard sell much like this article, but it was clear the poor guy was being forced to read from the "script" and wasn't having much fun doing it, so I played along just to be polite.
That conversation lasted about 3 minutes. Then he said he had to read some cancellation disclosure and "not to shoot the messenger". The disclosure said that AOL would let me retain my email address for free just to maintain a relationship. No catch. They will send me a confirmation to my AOL address and by US Mail. Interesting.
After that, he said he needed to transfer for another disclosure and to verify important details. The phone began to ring, and ring, and ring....it finally went dead. (I hope this doesn't mean my account isn't going to be cancelled...guess I'll have to check that email address)
Total time wasted: 20 minutes.
>We can expect Blu Ray releases of Istar and Gigli any day now.
;)
That's "Ishtar"! Please have respect for the classics!
>point to a single result coming from the shuttle program that was
>worth a human life?
The needs of the many outweigh the needs of a few. Sacrifice if part of exploration. Mountain climers willing sacrifice their lives and body parts just to climb that mountain. What good result comes from that?
Just use google to find successful shuttle experiments. As is typical in science, most experiments are failures. Very few result in something as dramatic as directly saving human lives. However, the failures also teach us what doesn't work. So in the long run we gain either way.
Could some of the projects be automated? Probably. But a human brain can think its way out of a jam better than any machine we hope to produce in the near future. Humans are creative, and can excel where machines fail.
To sum up, lots of people are willing to risk life and limb to explore...it's part of being human. Advances in knowledge usually come in small jumps...and who knows what seemingly trivial experiment might result in an earth-shattering technology?
Human safety is important. Part of space exploration is to make space safer for everyone. That alone can justify a space program.
Now that would be a story...
>I certainly hope that Apple doesn't buy nintendo (even if they could) because
>the reason nintendo are great is because the concentrate on games, games, games.
>No failed computer / pda / music player / whatever for them. They just concentrate
>on what they're good at.
Nintendo *HAS* failed at non-game endevors...a taxi company, vacuum cleaners, etc. The company is well over 100 years old. They've had their share of going down blind alleys.