God created earth 6194 years ago. All data that looks older is just part of the creation, and does not represent any 'atmosphere', just Gods attention do details in the creation. Maybe this is a way for God to tempt and test your faith and belief in him. (Along with dinosaur bones etc.)
Just to explain to the submitter if this is not already crystal clear: There is no need for NDGPS. WAAS has fortunaltely replaced it.
NDGPS required a seperate receiver to get the error signal from a ground based transmitter. You also had to be near a ground based error transmitter for this to work.
The ground based error transmitters are still there, and more are beeing added. Instead of transmitting locally, a database of errors over a wide area is constructed, and a geostationary sattelite transmits the error database on the same wavelenght as the other GPS sattelites to all GPS devices. All that is needed for this is typically a firmware update in the GPS unit.
"Little boy" was the gun method with U-235. Pu is not usable for this geometry "Trinity" and "Fat man" was the big bombs using symmetrical implosion with Pu-239. Both U-235 and Pu-239 is usable for this geometry. see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapon_design
Iran's path is certainly the one that can give them a nuclear weapon ASAP.
And BTW, Iran are obviously and clearly focussed on developing a nuclear bomb and multiple delivery methods. They are currently testing the pod and software for the delivery from their fighters. As much as it scares me, If I were Iran, I would also develop nuclear capability ASAP after beeing listed on the axis ov evil, just to ensure my survival.
OK, Lets try to just enter 1. Everybody *now*
on
Google Image Labeler
·
· Score: 1
OK, play this game this way: Lets try to just enter "1" as the label to all images. You may identify yourself with a name like (Just write 1)
When any of us are matched up together, we should easily get a new high score.
Other people will see that the high score is helt by "just write 1" and "always write 1", and soon catch on.
Not sure what you will use the points for, but at least you beat the game....
You can probably see from the screen names of the people that are current high score holders that this is just wha they did. Not sure if Google gets good data here.
Re:Poor humans still believe they are the pinnacle
on
Humanity Gene Found?
·
· Score: 1
..Well, we have quite certainly evolved from monkeys..
Are you sure you are using an impartial yardstick here? Imagine you are reading the history books a billion years from now.
Maybe the monkeys have a lot more sex, and are much more happy. They do not destroy the earth either.
Humans may be on a path to: 1. Create silicon based life that will evolve much fater than humans 2. Destroy and exhaust much of the earth resources.
This may not be very much more advanced than yeast in a vat of wine hurrying to extinction.
Poor humans still believe they are the pinnacle...
on
Humanity Gene Found?
·
· Score: 1
Poor humans are still trying to confirm that they are the pinnacle of the universe.
From believing they are in the center of god's creation, they have slowly, as their knowledge increased lost again and again. First they discovered that the earth was not the center of the universe, then that the sun was just a mediocre star in an average neighborhood in an average galaxy. Darwin taught them that they are just another leaf on the tree of life.
Now they are still clinging to the hope that their brains are so superior. The genome projects for some species may be the final nail in the coffin, for again they are likely to face disappointment.
Just get it: you are monkeys that can vocalize a little.
You watch a movie. It is 2 hours long. With ads and teasers for you to watch the next show, they drag it out to 3 hours.
The fee to content providers for a set of eyeballs watching a movie is about $0.10
So you are basically suckered into watching commerials for 1 hour for a $0.10 product.
You can get the movie from netflix for about $1.
I will not work for $1/hour, so I subscribe to netflix (and give MPAA money for attorneys unfortunately), and don't watch a single ads based show on TV.
My guess is that spiralfrog will be a similarly bad deal. The content will be in the WMA, and not MP3. Do you have to watch commercials for as long as the song plays?
The math here is just bogus. If you are in a house that is heated, a regular lightbulb just contributes to the heating of the house.
One watt emitted as heat reduces the needed heat from the heater with one watt as well. So with a thermostat and electrical heating, it does not matter at all how efficient your lamps are. Just get them cheap.
If you run an A/C, you need to look at the luminous efficiency, and an efficient bulb might be better.
I will however guess that for most households most of the time, you need to heat. Than there is no advantage in using a CFL. Only more expensive.
i would moderate this "funny". Anyway how would this box be any different from the box down at the cafe with wifi? Why work at home, and not away from home?
...In the future, the technology "could also be used an IP phone if the user is in a Wi-Fi hotspot outdoors, such as an airport, cafe, or conference centre for example. But we chose to concentrate first on usage at home,"...
So from a functionality perspective, this is just a regular cellphone away from home. No wi-fi hotspot. At home it has the marginal added functionality of using wi-fi.
A massproduced cellphone that also uses wi-fi hotspots would be *big* news. Otherwise, not very interesting.
BTW: How do you implement the "wi-fi at home only" crippling?
Book Review Network Algorithmics Network Algorithmics: An Interdisciplinary Approach to Designing Fast Networked Devices, by George Varghese, ISBN 0120884771, Morgan Kaufmann, 2004.
This is not a generic algorithms book (that is, it does not overlap much at all with Sedgewick or Coleman as an introduction to algorithms), nor is it a typical introduction to TCP/IP networking book (for example, there is no chapter defining the TCP/UDP/IP header fields, thank goodness). It might best be described as an algorithms analysis book set in the context of networking and also in the context of implementations that mix hardware and software solutions. For those familiar with Radia Perlman's book Interconnections, I found aspects of the writing style and approach to be similar. George Varghese--in addition to having been a networking professor for many years--has had a lot of industry experience from licensing algorithms to networking companies, to consulting with Procket Networks in the company's early days of architecting its core router, to starting a security company that was recently acquired by Cisco Systems. I have been doing architecture work at Cisco for several years and can say that George's book has real grounding in how systems are built and analyzed today.
Organization Chapter 2 presents abstractions for networking protocols, hardware design, routers, memory technology, and Internet end nodes (servers). This is a great introduction into "systems" thinking. In section 2.2.7, "Final Hardware Lessons," one thing I thought George should have mentioned along with metrics of chip size, speed, I/O, and memory is power. Power is becoming a major systems concern in many platforms and deserves mention as an optimization constraint.
Chapters 3 and 4 go through a list of 15 implementation principles to use in approaching algorithmic design in systems and then give examples of these principles in action. What I find interesting about this section is that from working with George in the past, he really does believe and practice "principle"-based architecture thinking. I remember discussing several of the principles with him several years ago, and you can see how his many years of experience working in the networking field have shaped these principles. Many have probably employed some of these, but as George says in the chapter introduction, having them explicitly documented with examples is useful to help clarify our thinking. Some of the principles (and both the short examples in this chapter as well as examples cited in more detail in later chapters) are really fundamental, and I think reading through examples helped clarify in my mind when to use them.
Chapter 5 covers copying data, for example, in a server design. I really like this type of chapter, in which a subject (in this case the effect of packet copying on Web server performance) is explored in detail but with a focus on where algorithms and systems design play an important part.
My biggest question about this chapter is that I was unsure how applicable this is to, say, modern server design using Linux and with latest Gigabit Ethernet network-interface-card (NIC) designs. I know there was a lot of interesting work in the late 1990s, but this chapter without any data is more along the lines of an extended example of how to apply implementation principles.
Chapters 6 through 9 are not what I would consider the meat of the book; they treat the topics of implementation and analysis for servers, timers, parsing/classification of packets, and buffer management (memory allocation).
Chapter 10 covers exact match lookups. There is not a lot of meaty algorithmic discussion, but the history of scaling performance of bridges is used to
They claim they are trying to have scientists and other find an interest in their technology, and prove or disprove their claims.
Funny thing is that even on their own web pages http://www.steorn.net/ there is no products, description, pictures, technical info, general overview or *anything else* that describes the technology.
I would like to suggest that Roland Piquepailles submissions be placed in a seperate blog.
I read/. to get real news and facts, and see discussions from people with insight. Roland Piquepailles submissions are usually vague quasiscience or fiction.
It seems this last one "Morphine Relief Without Addiction?", is just some graduate students learning to synthsize a compound with no empirical data it is any more useful than sand. I quote: "The *idea* is that we *can* send it to NIH to test to see if it kills pain"
You should mod this up if you agree or mod away as flamebait/offtopic/troll if you dont agree, but at least mod it.
(Please check mine:) The barycenter of earth moon can not escape the surface of the earth. Its a late post, and i wasted 2 minutes to do the math but here it is:
Moon has to be 822 000 km away for barycenter to lay on the surface on the earth. Today r=380 000 km
earth rotational inertia is transferred to the moon (tidal) nonelastically. The earths rotational inertia is only twice the moons orbital rotational inertia. This is not enough to 'push' the moon that far away.
The result should be a system with an earth day = a month = a moon day = 47 current days, and moon-earth distance ~510 000 km.
The moon is still a moon, and no planet per definition.
NASA estimated that the shuttle costs $330M for each launch. This was back before the Columbia accident, when they had fairly regular launches. With all the redevelopment and reduced fligth frequency, it must be well over half a billion $$$ now.
For comparison, an average US family of 4 pays $7000 in taxes a year, so every launch blows away all income tax revenue for a town the size of Birmingham, Alabama.
Of course he is correct. He should however have been aware of these issues from day one, not right before delivery. All technology companies I know of have weekly status meetings. The key is *no surprises*. If any issue can impact functionality, finish date or any other deliverable each person is required to flag and report immediately.
To get such a huge surprise so late in the game just demonstrated incompetence of both management and at all levels througout the team.
Here is waht Zalmai Azmi, the FBI's top technology officer observed weeks before the project was finished: ============== As far as Zalmai Azmi was concerned, the FBI's technological revolution was only weeks away.
It appeared to work beautifully. Until Azmi, now the FBI's technology chief, asked about the error rate.
Software problem reports, or SPRs, numbered in the hundreds
"A month before delivery, you don't have SPRs," Azmi said. "You're making things pretty. . . . You're changing colors." ===========
Either Zalmai Azmi, the FBI's top technology officer 1. Has no clue what his job description is 2. Has no clue about technology project management.
Slashdot Mirror
On http://www.tradesports.com/v2/ the current odds that the "New internet gaming law" is passed and signed is at 18%.
God created earth 6194 years ago. All data that looks older is just part of the creation, and does not represent any 'atmosphere', just Gods attention do details in the creation. Maybe this is a way for God to tempt and test your faith and belief in him. (Along with dinosaur bones etc.)
There is no need for NDGPS. How WAAS works
Just to explain to the submitter if this is not already crystal clear: There is no need for NDGPS. WAAS has fortunaltely replaced it.
NDGPS required a seperate receiver to get the error signal from a ground based transmitter. You also had to be near a ground based error transmitter for this to work.
The ground based error transmitters are still there, and more are beeing added. Instead of transmitting locally, a database of errors over a wide area is constructed, and a geostationary sattelite transmits the error database on the same wavelenght as the other GPS sattelites to all GPS devices. All that is needed for this is typically a firmware update in the GPS unit.
Simple, effective, cheap.
"Little boy" was the gun method with U-235. Pu is not usable for this geometryn
"Trinity" and "Fat man" was the big bombs using symmetrical implosion with Pu-239. Both U-235 and Pu-239 is usable for this geometry. see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapon_desig
Iran's path is certainly the one that can give them a nuclear weapon ASAP.
And BTW, Iran are obviously and clearly focussed on developing a nuclear bomb and multiple delivery methods. They are currently testing the pod and software for the delivery from their fighters.
As much as it scares me, If I were Iran, I would also develop nuclear capability ASAP after beeing listed on the axis ov evil, just to ensure my survival.
OK, play this game this way:
Lets try to just enter "1" as the label to all images.
You may identify yourself with a name like (Just write 1)
When any of us are matched up together, we should easily get a new high score.
Other people will see that the high score is helt by "just write 1" and "always write 1", and soon catch on.
Not sure what you will use the points for, but at least you beat the game....
You can probably see from the screen names of the people that are current high score holders that this is just wha they did. Not sure if Google gets good data here.
..Well, we have quite certainly evolved from monkeys..
Are you sure you are using an impartial yardstick here? Imagine you are reading the history books a billion years from now.
Maybe the monkeys have a lot more sex, and are much more happy. They do not destroy the earth either.
Humans may be on a path to:
1. Create silicon based life that will evolve much fater than humans
2. Destroy and exhaust much of the earth resources.
This may not be very much more advanced than yeast in a vat of wine hurrying to extinction.
Poor humans are still trying to confirm that they are the pinnacle of the universe.
From believing they are in the center of god's creation, they have slowly, as their knowledge increased lost again and again. First they discovered that the earth was not the center of the universe, then that the sun was just a mediocre star in an average neighborhood in an average galaxy. Darwin taught them that they are just another leaf on the tree of life.
Now they are still clinging to the hope that their brains are so superior. The genome projects for some species may be the final nail in the coffin, for again they are likely to face disappointment.
Just get it: you are monkeys that can vocalize a little.
Just to compare it to 'free' braodcast TV.
You watch a movie. It is 2 hours long. With ads and teasers for you to watch the next show, they drag it out to 3 hours.
The fee to content providers for a set of eyeballs watching a movie is about $0.10
So you are basically suckered into watching commerials for 1 hour for a $0.10 product.
You can get the movie from netflix for about $1.
I will not work for $1/hour, so I subscribe to netflix (and give MPAA money for attorneys unfortunately), and don't watch a single ads based show on TV.
My guess is that spiralfrog will be a similarly bad deal. The content will be in the WMA, and not MP3. Do you have to watch commercials for as long as the song plays?
The math here is just bogus. If you are in a house that is heated, a regular lightbulb just contributes to the heating of the house.
One watt emitted as heat reduces the needed heat from the heater with one watt as well. So with a thermostat and electrical heating, it does not matter at all how efficient your lamps are. Just get them cheap.
If you run an A/C, you need to look at the luminous efficiency, and an efficient bulb might be better.
I will however guess that for most households most of the time, you need to heat. Than there is no advantage in using a CFL. Only more expensive.
i would moderate this "funny". Anyway how would this box be any different from the box down at the cafe with wifi? Why work at home, and not away from home?
Hate to klikk on the last /. story only to find that the story broke on digg, and when /. comes after, the servier is dugg down.
Editors: Get fresh stories!
...In the future, the technology "could also be used an IP phone if the user is in a Wi-Fi hotspot outdoors, such as an airport, cafe, or conference centre for example. But we chose to concentrate first on usage at home,"...
So from a functionality perspective, this is just a regular cellphone away from home. No wi-fi hotspot. At home it has the marginal added functionality of using wi-fi.
A massproduced cellphone that also uses wi-fi hotspots would be *big* news. Otherwise, not very interesting.
BTW: How do you implement the "wi-fi at home only" crippling?
Compared to cost of living, $1 in china probably buys you the same as $200 in Australia, so maybe they are spending the same in actual effort.
Seems this same book was reviewed by someone who actually read it:
http://www.cisco.com/web/about/ac123/ac147/archive d_issues/ipj_8-3/book_review.html
and i copy:
Book Review
Network Algorithmics
Network Algorithmics: An Interdisciplinary Approach to Designing Fast Networked Devices, by George Varghese, ISBN 0120884771, Morgan Kaufmann, 2004.
This is not a generic algorithms book (that is, it does not overlap much at all with Sedgewick or Coleman as an introduction to algorithms), nor is it a typical introduction to TCP/IP networking book (for example, there is no chapter defining the TCP/UDP/IP header fields, thank goodness). It might best be described as an algorithms analysis book set in the context of networking and also in the context of implementations that mix hardware and software solutions. For those familiar with Radia Perlman's book Interconnections, I found aspects of the writing style and approach to be similar. George Varghese--in addition to having been a networking professor for many years--has had a lot of industry experience from licensing algorithms to networking companies, to consulting with Procket Networks in the company's early days of architecting its core router, to starting a security company that was recently acquired by Cisco Systems. I have been doing architecture work at Cisco for several years and can say that George's book has real grounding in how systems are built and analyzed today.
Organization
Chapter 2 presents abstractions for networking protocols, hardware design, routers, memory technology, and Internet end nodes (servers). This is a great introduction into "systems" thinking. In section 2.2.7, "Final Hardware Lessons," one thing I thought George should have mentioned along with metrics of chip size, speed, I/O, and memory is power. Power is becoming a major systems concern in many platforms and deserves mention as an optimization constraint.
Chapters 3 and 4 go through a list of 15 implementation principles to use in approaching algorithmic design in systems and then give examples of these principles in action. What I find interesting about this section is that from working with George in the past, he really does believe and practice "principle"-based architecture thinking. I remember discussing several of the principles with him several years ago, and you can see how his many years of experience working in the networking field have shaped these principles. Many have probably employed some of these, but as George says in the chapter introduction, having them explicitly documented with examples is useful to help clarify our thinking. Some of the principles (and both the short examples in this chapter as well as examples cited in more detail in later chapters) are really fundamental, and I think reading through examples helped clarify in my mind when to use them.
Chapter 5 covers copying data, for example, in a server design. I really like this type of chapter, in which a subject (in this case the effect of packet copying on Web server performance) is explored in detail but with a focus on where algorithms and systems design play an important part.
My biggest question about this chapter is that I was unsure how applicable this is to, say, modern server design using Linux and with latest Gigabit Ethernet network-interface-card (NIC) designs. I know there was a lot of interesting work in the late 1990s, but this chapter without any data is more along the lines of an extended example of how to apply implementation principles.
Chapters 6 through 9 are not what I would consider the meat of the book; they treat the topics of implementation and analysis for servers, timers, parsing/classification of packets, and buffer management (memory allocation).
Chapter 10 covers exact match lookups. There is not a lot of meaty algorithmic discussion, but the history of scaling performance of bridges is used to
There are so many kooks out there that you need to do some triage to filter away garbage, so you can keep an open mind about interesting theories.
I did the triage for you.
They claim they are trying to have scientists and other find an interest in their technology, and prove or disprove their claims.
Funny thing is that even on their own web pages http://www.steorn.net/ there is no products, description, pictures, technical info, general overview or *anything else* that describes the technology.
I call this bogus
...and thanks for all the fish
I would like to suggest that Roland Piquepailles submissions be placed in a seperate blog.
/. to get real news and facts, and see discussions from people with insight.
I read
Roland Piquepailles submissions are usually vague quasiscience or fiction.
It seems this last one "Morphine Relief Without Addiction?", is just some graduate students learning to synthsize a compound with no empirical data it is any more useful than sand. I quote: "The *idea* is that we *can* send it to NIH to test to see if it kills pain"
You should mod this up if you agree or mod away as flamebait/offtopic/troll if you dont agree, but at least mod it.
(Please check mine:)
The barycenter of earth moon can not escape the surface of the earth.
Its a late post, and i wasted 2 minutes to do the math but here it is:
Moon has to be 822 000 km away for barycenter to lay on the surface on the earth. Today r=380 000 km
earth rotational inertia is transferred to the moon (tidal) nonelastically. The earths rotational inertia is only twice the moons orbital rotational inertia. This is not enough to 'push' the moon that far away.
The result should be a system with an earth day = a month = a moon day = 47 current days, and moon-earth distance ~510 000 km.
The moon is still a moon, and no planet per definition.
NASA estimated that the shuttle costs $330M for each launch. This was back before the Columbia accident, when they had fairly regular launches. With all the redevelopment and reduced fligth frequency, it must be well over half a billion $$$ now.
For comparison, an average US family of 4 pays $7000 in taxes a year, so every launch blows away all income tax revenue for a town the size of Birmingham, Alabama.
Nitpicky I know, but pound-force is not a unit of pressure. What you probably meant is "pound is not a unit of force".
Eucledian geometry has been completed centuries ago. Isn't it all very simple?
/. discuss more recent issues?
Let's discuss how we add 2 and 2. Should we count fingers, or should we rather count coins?
Shouldn't
David Halprins background is "tertiary level mathematics". What is that?
Of course he is correct. He should however have been aware of these issues from day one, not right before delivery. All technology companies I know of have weekly status meetings. The key is *no surprises*. If any issue can impact functionality, finish date or any other deliverable each person is required to flag and report immediately.
To get such a huge surprise so late in the game just demonstrated incompetence of both management and at all levels througout the team.
Here is waht Zalmai Azmi, the FBI's top technology officer observed weeks before the project was finished:
==============
As far as Zalmai Azmi was concerned, the FBI's technological revolution was only weeks away.
It appeared to work beautifully. Until Azmi, now the FBI's technology chief, asked about the error rate.
Software problem reports, or SPRs, numbered in the hundreds
"A month before delivery, you don't have SPRs," Azmi said. "You're making things pretty. . . . You're changing colors."
===========
Either Zalmai Azmi, the FBI's top technology officer
1. Has no clue what his job description is
2. Has no clue about technology project management.
In either case, truly sad.
Who reads BBC news for scientific discovery?
_ Record_fT.pdf
Summary:
http://eprints.ecs.soton.ac.uk/12112/
pdf:
http://eprints.ecs.soton.ac.uk/12112/01/2006_Kham