Meh...where I live (Alaska), it doesn't matter if you have GSM or CDMA -- if you are outside of the three major (ahem) cities and a handful of outlying communities, the only mobile service you will find is satellite:)
It's getting better, but the vast majority of the state has no cellular service of any kind whatsoever.
In much the same way that ancient Chinese bottle rockets ultimately led to the Saturn V or the way that a marathon runner started by taking a few tentative steps while holding on to a coffee table around 10-12 months of age.
Most progress is not the result of someone getting a brilliant idea and immediately creating a finished product. Rather, progress is the result of incremental steps, with the first baby steps being to simplify the problem and learn the best ways of accomplishing the goal, then slowly making the problem harder until you have achieved your ultimate goal. Likewise, MIT has simplified the problem of landing on a power line by doing so under controlled conditions with wall-mounted cameras. As they gain experience, they will learn how to improve their perching algorithms until an entirely self-contained system flying in the real world is possible.
Seriously, this is/. which is *supposed* to be populated by geeks. I would think here, of all places, we would understand how science and technology progresses [:rolleyes:]
Which would make actually hooking up *much* easier, since you need to be nose up which is why you can stall.
Well...yes, but not exactly. You can still in any flight attitude (that is, angle between the longitudinal axis of the airplane and the ground). The only criteria to stalling is that the angle of attack (the angle between the chord line of the wing and the relative wind) exceed ~14 degrees or so (the exact angle is a function of the airfoil). Aerobatic pilots can stall their airplane even if the nose is pointed at the ground. F-15 pilots, because an empty (or nearly so) F-15 has a thrust:weight ratio of greater than 1:1, can point the nose vertically and still not stall.
What I don't understand is how it is going to take off again. It'd need to unhook and flip nose down before it hit the ground with enough height left to get the speed to generate lift. That doesn't seem like such an easy thing to do...
Since they are essentially talking about R/C airplanes, I don't think it's really going to be that hard. R/C airplanes have had more in common with helicopters than full-scale airplanes for quite a while now:) If the engine and propeller can generate more thrust than the airplane weighs, then -- like the F-15 I mentioned before or a helicopter -- you can substitute thrust for lift until the airplane is moving fast enough to fly again.
What facts? The only facts in this entire thread are from O.P. and Martin Blank. Everything else -- including your comment -- are merely opinions. You might be able to argue that Shakrai's comment (which, interestingly enough, was modded "troll" as of the time I type this) that a.38 special is a more effective means of preventing a rape than Facebook is also a fact, but [Citation Needed].
Sounds like Mythbusters should have spent a little more time hanging out at the local rock gym. It's a pretty well-known fact among rock climbers that it's better to keep your weight on your legs rather than your arms. You can walk on your legs all day, but you can only do handstands for a few minutes. You can always tell the n00bs at the local rock wall or rock gym because they try to pull themselves up the route with brute upper-body strength.
This mission demonstrated some technologies that have already been proven in discrete test-beds but failed spectacularly to integrate them into one successful whole.
Discrete testbeds != space. Saying that each of these systems worked independently on earth, therefore they should have been 100% perfect when connected together and launched into space is rather ignorant. Unexpected corner cases often crop up when disparate systems are integrated into a new design. The *purpose* of Hayabusa was to see how these things worked together, and obviously there is still much to be learned from this experiment.
IMHO, 100 points was not "setting the bar too low." Rather, if you built an *experimental* vehicle and there are no glitches and everything works perfectly the first time, you set the bar too low and were afraid to take enough chances.
I disagree: "I have not failed. I've just found 10000 ways that won't work." --Thomas Edison
Yes, Hayabusa was plagued by a number of failures and setbacks. However, IIRC, JAXA is still relatively new to the space game, and rocket science is, well, rocket science. Space is much harsher environment than most of us living in basements will ever realize. The fact that JAXA kept Hayabusa going despite the failures is *anything* but incompetent. As another poster mentioned, look at the Hayabusa project milestones. There were a lot of systems failures, but the project was anything but a failure.
Even if you were to call the project a failure, I'm reminded of the story of a new hire at an investment firm. The new hire is really promising, and his boss puts him in charge of some big investments for a really important client. For a while, the new hire is doing phenomenally well, but one day, he makes a bad decision, the client loses a lot of money and leaves the investment firm. The new hire, knowing how badly he screwed up, sadly drafts his resignation, and delivers it to his boss. His boss reads over the resignation letter, tears it up, throws it in the trash and says to the new hire, "Quit? Are you insane? I've just invested several million dollars in your education! Now get back out there and show me I made a wise investment."
I think perhaps you are reading more into his question than is really there. I took it as, "I would like a tattoo. I really like math and science, so I would like whatever tattoo I get to relate to those areas of interests." It's always possible that my bias is influencing my interpretation of his question, but I really don't see why he is getting slammed so badly for 1) wanting a tattoo and 2) wanting one relevant to his area(s) of interest.
Give me a break. If he was posting for advice on the ultimate gaming PC, would you still be encouraging him to donate his money for one of these causing and flipping him crap for being "selfish"?
...I have never personally seen the appeal of them and never had the inclination to have any done. But that does *NOT* mean I am a boring person...
Fair enough.
Likewise, I try very hard not to judge anyone on first appearances...but the fact is, and yes, call it old-fashioned, if I don't know you and you walk up to me in the street, if you've got one or more tattoos showing that's going to immediately put you at a disadvantage in my eyes.
Apparently, you aren't trying that hard, then. And that initial pre-disposition to look down on someone because of a harmless choice of self-expression that you happen to disagree with does, IMHO, make you a boring person (or at least, a somewhat stuffy, uptight person anyway).
Except that 'screw everybody else' is an attitude and most attitudes are temporary/reactionary. To an 18 year old, its an absolute mantra, to a 35 year old, its being childish.
There's some healthy rationale for saying 'screw everybody else'. If you spend your whole life worrying what everyone else thinks about you all the time, then by the time you're 50, you'll die a miserable, hypertensive, nervous wreck. I'm not advocating immature, 18-year-old punk-rock, knee-jerk rebellion, but there is value in saying, "I know what you think, but I'm my own person, and I'll make my own decisions, thanks." Every time I've chosen others' advice over the advice of my own heart, I've regretted it.
To the O.P.: if you want a tat and math/science is your thing, then go for it. As for what to get, I can't help you there, but don't let the nay-sayers discourage you. Isn't there a song somewhere that says, "It's better to regret something you did, than something you didn't do"?
It's not a matter of whether or not I can be bothered; it's whether or not I am qualified to search for exploits. My programming skills are sufficient to make my life as a sys admin easier, but I am not nearly good enough to search for security holes in Postfix, for example. You raise a good point - there are many of us who wouldn't recognize a security exploit in C code, even if it was pointed out to us, but I suspect there are people who *do* based upon the fact that open source software is *at least* as secure, overall, as comparable commercial products.
The beauty of open source is not that you personally can check all of your installed apps to make sure none of them are doing anything evil (although that is a good thing). It's that there are thousands of eyes looking over that source code -- many (most, probably) of them far more skilled than mine. Malware will be outed, even if I'm not the one who finds it.
Got that right. The other day, on my way to work (a 6 mile commute, with a max speed limit of 50 mph), the GPS app I've got on my Android said I had traveled 458 miles and my current speed was a 122 mph (I had traveled maybe two miles, and my speed had yet to hit even the 50 mph max on that route). A few days later, the location tracker software I was testing showed that in the space of three minutes, I had traveled from Anchorage to near Iliamna Lake and back. That's a distance of about 150 miles, over water and mountains, and there's no road between the two locations. Even my airplane couldn't cover that distance in that time span:)
I don't believe so. I've worked as an ISP sys admin, and I've contacted Spamhaus to request removal of IP addresses in my netblock and I never had problems with Spamhaus honoring those requests when we showed that we had reacted appropriately to the problem (terminating spammers' accounts, advising users their computers were infected with spambots, etc.).
Slashdot Mirror
In which case, you can still see them (at least in IR).
Meh...where I live (Alaska), it doesn't matter if you have GSM or CDMA -- if you are outside of the three major (ahem) cities and a handful of outlying communities, the only mobile service you will find is satellite :)
It's getting better, but the vast majority of the state has no cellular service of any kind whatsoever.
In much the same way that ancient Chinese bottle rockets ultimately led to the Saturn V or the way that a marathon runner started by taking a few tentative steps while holding on to a coffee table around 10-12 months of age.
/. which is *supposed* to be populated by geeks. I would think here, of all places, we would understand how science and technology progresses [:rolleyes:]
Most progress is not the result of someone getting a brilliant idea and immediately creating a finished product. Rather, progress is the result of incremental steps, with the first baby steps being to simplify the problem and learn the best ways of accomplishing the goal, then slowly making the problem harder until you have achieved your ultimate goal. Likewise, MIT has simplified the problem of landing on a power line by doing so under controlled conditions with wall-mounted cameras. As they gain experience, they will learn how to improve their perching algorithms until an entirely self-contained system flying in the real world is possible.
Seriously, this is
Which would make actually hooking up *much* easier, since you need to be nose up which is why you can stall.
Well...yes, but not exactly. You can still in any flight attitude (that is, angle between the longitudinal axis of the airplane and the ground). The only criteria to stalling is that the angle of attack (the angle between the chord line of the wing and the relative wind) exceed ~14 degrees or so (the exact angle is a function of the airfoil). Aerobatic pilots can stall their airplane even if the nose is pointed at the ground. F-15 pilots, because an empty (or nearly so) F-15 has a thrust:weight ratio of greater than 1:1, can point the nose vertically and still not stall.
What I don't understand is how it is going to take off again. It'd need to unhook and flip nose down before it hit the ground with enough height left to get the speed to generate lift. That doesn't seem like such an easy thing to do...
Since they are essentially talking about R/C airplanes, I don't think it's really going to be that hard. R/C airplanes have had more in common with helicopters than full-scale airplanes for quite a while now :) If the engine and propeller can generate more thrust than the airplane weighs, then -- like the F-15 I mentioned before or a helicopter -- you can substitute thrust for lift until the airplane is moving fast enough to fly again.
(dons tin-foil hat)
You forgot to mention the Anti-virus industry, too...
Nimby: Nimitz In My Back Yard?
What facts? The only facts in this entire thread are from O.P. and Martin Blank. Everything else -- including your comment -- are merely opinions. You might be able to argue that Shakrai's comment (which, interestingly enough, was modded "troll" as of the time I type this) that a .38 special is a more effective means of preventing a rape than Facebook is also a fact, but [Citation Needed].
Where, oh where, are the mod points when I need them? Well said. I'd mod you up if I could.
"You cannot win, George. If you strike me down, I shall become more powerful than you can possibly imagine."
Sounds like Mythbusters should have spent a little more time hanging out at the local rock gym. It's a pretty well-known fact among rock climbers that it's better to keep your weight on your legs rather than your arms. You can walk on your legs all day, but you can only do handstands for a few minutes. You can always tell the n00bs at the local rock wall or rock gym because they try to pull themselves up the route with brute upper-body strength.
This mission demonstrated some technologies that have already been proven in discrete test-beds but failed spectacularly to integrate them into one successful whole.
Discrete testbeds != space. Saying that each of these systems worked independently on earth, therefore they should have been 100% perfect when connected together and launched into space is rather ignorant. Unexpected corner cases often crop up when disparate systems are integrated into a new design. The *purpose* of Hayabusa was to see how these things worked together, and obviously there is still much to be learned from this experiment.
IMHO, 100 points was not "setting the bar too low." Rather, if you built an *experimental* vehicle and there are no glitches and everything works perfectly the first time, you set the bar too low and were afraid to take enough chances.
I disagree: "I have not failed. I've just found 10000 ways that won't work." --Thomas Edison
Yes, Hayabusa was plagued by a number of failures and setbacks. However, IIRC, JAXA is still relatively new to the space game, and rocket science is, well, rocket science. Space is much harsher environment than most of us living in basements will ever realize. The fact that JAXA kept Hayabusa going despite the failures is *anything* but incompetent. As another poster mentioned, look at the Hayabusa project milestones. There were a lot of systems failures, but the project was anything but a failure.
Even if you were to call the project a failure, I'm reminded of the story of a new hire at an investment firm. The new hire is really promising, and his boss puts him in charge of some big investments for a really important client. For a while, the new hire is doing phenomenally well, but one day, he makes a bad decision, the client loses a lot of money and leaves the investment firm. The new hire, knowing how badly he screwed up, sadly drafts his resignation, and delivers it to his boss. His boss reads over the resignation letter, tears it up, throws it in the trash and says to the new hire, "Quit? Are you insane? I've just invested several million dollars in your education! Now get back out there and show me I made a wise investment."
I think perhaps you are reading more into his question than is really there. I took it as, "I would like a tattoo. I really like math and science, so I would like whatever tattoo I get to relate to those areas of interests." It's always possible that my bias is influencing my interpretation of his question, but I really don't see why he is getting slammed so badly for 1) wanting a tattoo and 2) wanting one relevant to his area(s) of interest.
As a fellow motorcyclist and geek..."Sweet!"
Offtopic: what do you ride?
Give me a break. If he was posting for advice on the ultimate gaming PC, would you still be encouraging him to donate his money for one of these causing and flipping him crap for being "selfish"?
...I have never personally seen the appeal of them and never had the inclination to have any done. But that does *NOT* mean I am a boring person...
Fair enough.
Likewise, I try very hard not to judge anyone on first appearances...but the fact is, and yes, call it old-fashioned, if I don't know you and you walk up to me in the street, if you've got one or more tattoos showing that's going to immediately put you at a disadvantage in my eyes.
Apparently, you aren't trying that hard, then. And that initial pre-disposition to look down on someone because of a harmless choice of self-expression that you happen to disagree with does, IMHO, make you a boring person (or at least, a somewhat stuffy, uptight person anyway).
ATGATT. 'Nuff said.
Except that 'screw everybody else' is an attitude and most attitudes are temporary/reactionary. To an 18 year old, its an absolute mantra, to a 35 year old, its being childish.
There's some healthy rationale for saying 'screw everybody else'. If you spend your whole life worrying what everyone else thinks about you all the time, then by the time you're 50, you'll die a miserable, hypertensive, nervous wreck. I'm not advocating immature, 18-year-old punk-rock, knee-jerk rebellion, but there is value in saying, "I know what you think, but I'm my own person, and I'll make my own decisions, thanks." Every time I've chosen others' advice over the advice of my own heart, I've regretted it.
To the O.P.: if you want a tat and math/science is your thing, then go for it. As for what to get, I can't help you there, but don't let the nay-sayers discourage you. Isn't there a song somewhere that says, "It's better to regret something you did, than something you didn't do"?
It's not a matter of whether or not I can be bothered; it's whether or not I am qualified to search for exploits. My programming skills are sufficient to make my life as a sys admin easier, but I am not nearly good enough to search for security holes in Postfix, for example. You raise a good point - there are many of us who wouldn't recognize a security exploit in C code, even if it was pointed out to us, but I suspect there are people who *do* based upon the fact that open source software is *at least* as secure, overall, as comparable commercial products.
You, sir, just completely made my morning. Wish I could mod you up.
The beauty of open source is not that you personally can check all of your installed apps to make sure none of them are doing anything evil (although that is a good thing). It's that there are thousands of eyes looking over that source code -- many (most, probably) of them far more skilled than mine. Malware will be outed, even if I'm not the one who finds it.
Interesting, and thanks. In light of what you added to what I already knew about the case (not enough, apparently), I stand corrected.
Yeah, I had a bit of a problem with that...
Latitude on the android isn't that accurate.
Got that right. The other day, on my way to work (a 6 mile commute, with a max speed limit of 50 mph), the GPS app I've got on my Android said I had traveled 458 miles and my current speed was a 122 mph (I had traveled maybe two miles, and my speed had yet to hit even the 50 mph max on that route). A few days later, the location tracker software I was testing showed that in the space of three minutes, I had traveled from Anchorage to near Iliamna Lake and back. That's a distance of about 150 miles, over water and mountains, and there's no road between the two locations. Even my airplane couldn't cover that distance in that time span :)
I don't believe so. I've worked as an ISP sys admin, and I've contacted Spamhaus to request removal of IP addresses in my netblock and I never had problems with Spamhaus honoring those requests when we showed that we had reacted appropriately to the problem (terminating spammers' accounts, advising users their computers were infected with spambots, etc.).