Re: Earth orbit?
Presumably they mean LEO.
1858 posts • joined 5 Mar 2007
Presumably they mean LEO.
Just popped open the app drawer on my phone and, lo and behold, an essentially identical icon is used for the Voice Search app. It even has rounded corners!
These design patents are silly. At least they haven't managed to snag a real patent on the thing. Things aren't that far gone yet.
Though, come to think of it, I do recall a very similar design on a button in the railway station under Arlanda airport...
Apollo could carry 5 astronauts with the addition of two more seats in the equipment bays from the very start. Improvements meant it could probably have carried 6 or even 7 by the time it was used on Spacelab, though things would have been rather cosy.
Dragon has significantly more internal space due to the miniaturisation of much of the tech involved and it's not inconceivable that it could also carry 6 without any difficulty, or more if you want to get really friendly with your fellow passengers.
But lets just assume that they haven't made any advances at all on the Apollo-era tech and that they're never going to make any cost-saving improvements at all. Ever. That makes it so much easier to argue against the idea.
This would be equivalent to being required to pay a tax for pointing at a newspaper and saying "there's a story in there about the big event that happened yesterday".
hplasm nutshells it. There seems to be this strange idea that everything should just be handed to "us" (us being teachers, students, workers or whoever) on a silver platter without any effort. Life is not like that. Life is hard and painful and requires that we do something to get something.
Oh fine, if you want to get picky about it, they're tin-plated steel, the point is that it would have been unthinkable to use tin for that in the not so distant past. Once it was used as jewellery, now it's used to prevent corrosion in disposable cans.
Think outside the box then. Gold and copper reach price and supply parity. Now, you'll find that gold would be used in place of copper for a lot of jobs, because it doesn't corrode or oxidise and is somewhat more ductile, thus less likely to break in stressful installations.
Tin used to be a precious metal. Now it's used to make cans. The point is that an increase in supply allows the market to experiment with new uses for a material. And yes, there may be something that people don't want to use, but I'd be surprised if any raw materials - particularly metals - would fall under that category.
A lot of these arguments are also applicable to earlier "novel" infrastructure projects. Uranium mining in Australia, for instance. Or oil in saudi arabia. The market for oil was growing but constrained when the saudi fields were exploited and there was a certain worry that it would cause a price crash that would make the whole endeavour pointless.
After a short lag the demand rose to consume the supply. If we're able to source large quantities of what are currently relatively rare materials from space, they will be used. The price might bounce around a bit before it settles down but the market will expand once the supply is there and new uses for the materials are found.
Nah, the Ewoks were Lucas's idea.
I'm just glad to see someone spell "tenterhooks" right for once.
I always figured the mid-life crisis kicked in around the end of a pre-agricultural human's typical lifespan. In the grand scheme, the ability for the majority of humans to live into old age is a very recent phenomenon; our bodies are adapted to a lifespan of about 40 to 50 years and start to fail in increasingly obvious ways after that age. The depression only seems natural in that case. We'd be subconsciously, but intimately aware that our body is reaching a lifespan limit that our species has experienced for millennia and as a result we'd get all existential and depressed, but not really understand why. Those humans that live longer would cheer up, because they might just live forever.
Did you just seriously compare a news and entertainment company to the people tasked with defending our borders?
Libel is a civil offence, not a criminal one. There's no jail time involved unless you refuse to pay the fines (or undertake whatever reparation the court hands out), in which case you're attempting to commit fraud amongst other things. Even then it's kind of hard to get you in jail for it.
And since it's a civil matter there's no criminal record.
And, incidentally, "wouldn't have", not "wouldn't of".
You also slip into "no smoke without fire" fallacy.
0/10 would not give time of day.
Nono, Torres was the engineer on Voyager.
Given "planet" descends from the greek for "wanderer", it's more accurately a planet than anything in our solar system.
And the mona lisa is just paint on a lump of wood.
It's art, you... you philistine!
Nah I'm kiddin, you're great, really.
Except it makes cheap ION gear look seriously overpriced for the performance you get.
As far as I can tell, the sort of "hardcore gamer" that buys a whole PC in one go is treating it more like a games console with a short upgrade cycle and none of the hardware lock-down that prevents them playing old games.
The very concept of "the scientific establishment" is unscientific. Scientific fact is not determined by authority, but by the establishment and exercise of verifiable, repeatable experiments.
The quickest way to tax profit is to tax where that profit comes from: sales.
I'm no randian. I simply start from the position that government is a necessary evil that we should have as little of as possible and work from there. Rand argued that government was unnecessary. Very different position.
Pay what they owe? Who says they "owe" anything? Governments are not gods, they have no more right to another entity's money than any other random collection of bureaucrats. Taxes are an imposition extracted through the state's monopoly on the use of force, they are not a moral imperative, and avoiding them is not an immoral act.
But putting that aside for the moment, if you want to stop corporations avoiding taxes, then the solution is not to lambast them for "immorality", but instead to move the taxes to where they can't be avoided. Get rid of corporation taxes and all those other things and tax sales instead. It's virtually impossible to evade or avoid sales tax, and it's much easier to resolve if they try.
Metics were foreigners and slaves, never a majority, even in Athens.
Hoi polloi literally means "the many" or the majority, and was never used for the category you're thinking of. If anything that would be hoi oligoi. I don't know what Apple fanboys would be called in Ancient Greece, but I'm pretty sure it would be rude.
Minor mistakes. Are you fucking kidding me?
Speaking with my Christian hat on for a moment, it annoys me the number of times people invoke God as a justification for whatever bit of pseudo-scientific nonsense they're foisting on the general population (in turn to justify raising taxes and throwing more money at international NGOs who exist only to, er, justify their existence apparently).
But then I always believed God was a libertarian so I'm probably somewhat atypical. :D
Stupidity isn't limited to any particular social group - nor is wisdom and intelligence, before anyone decides to claim that group X is dumb because they do or do not believe in hypothetical concept Y.
I'm going to have some coffee.
No, that's choice. You seem to be complaining that there will be relatively painless alternatives when an open source project up and dies.
What happens when proprietary software is abandoned? No choice there. You have to find something else that likely is completely incompatible with your existing system. With the forks you at least have something that resembles what you already do, and most likely have something that is exactly the same as the software you already use, except it has some bug fixes and Feature X tacked on.
Like comedy and tragedy, the difference is timing.
Douglas Adams lauded Apple at a time when they were good at what they did and didn't try patenting the platonic solids. Fry lauds Apple at a time when they're arsewipes of the highest order.
That must be why the US is occupying Mecca and bombing the rest of the arabian peninsula into the dirt right now.
Transmission losses and conversion losses make the final efficiency of electrical cars approximately the same as internal combustion (slightly worse, if I recall), yet there's little room for improvement without significant and possibly unachievable advances in technology. Batteries certainly can be improved, but the transmission losses are only going to go away if we can invent room-temperature superconductors and replace the entire national transmission infrastructure with them, and then invent a way to convert from high to low voltage without any power losses. And of course all electric vehicles have the same insurmountable problem: range and weight. They waste a lot of energy carting dead batteries around.
You want a truly efficient electric vehicle? Build a trolleybus. Put the electricity directly in from the supply when it's needed rather than converting it three times and losing most of it in the process. Of course that would mean every street in the country would need a dodgems-style electricity supply suspended over it and your car wouldn't be able to operate independent of that supply, but it's a small sacrifice to pay for increased efficiency, no?
Those behemoths are keeping the sea lanes safe from piracy. Perhaps you don't realise that international trade used to be fraught with danger until Great Britain began regular sea patrols around the world. The world economy went through a huge boom once that projection of force cut down piracy and made the seas safe for international trade. The US navy took over that role after world war 2 and it's only within the last decade, with politically correct rules of engagement that prevent decisively dealing with pirates, that piracy has started to become a problem again.
Of course, the difference with Sammy is, if people get fed up of their products, they can switch to another Android manufacturer and still have all their stuff.
Makes for a much easier transition away from the hated foe du jure.
The whole thing? No!
Hm, I must be a very peculiar case, given I use my transformer as both a laptop and a tablet. I do a lot of reading and a lot of writing and it's great for both roles.
Good on the plane too. Lasted all the way from Florence on a single charge. Very handy.
There's an allegory in that somewhere.
They're a metaphor for the relative freedom from misery that sanitary products apparently provide women and presumably for the joy that comes with not having to stuff rags down your pants and rinse them out in the river every day.
Seems all those years I spent at university have finally found a use...
Mm, yes, a hegemonising swarm set loose on the cloud...
In a sense it's no different to the early move of the film industry to California, a move that took place to avoid paying patent license fees on film equipment.
Er... no, we're not all on the autism spectrum. That's a stupid thing to say.
They make absolutely marvellous media things. I have one stuck to the back of the TV running raspbmc, and another running MPD. They don't need to be turned off and they consume virtually no power, especially compared to the PC I previously had running for both reasons.
And that's not even a particularly creative use for them. I've got plans for all sorts of nifty things to do with them.
No, Jason, not really. You see, aspies have a very well developed sense of humour and are not the humourless robots you seem to believe they are, but are in fact human beings just like everyone else.
There's this concept called "multiple redundant systems". Rather big in backup circles, tends to get mentioned a lot in the IT press.
The clock doesn't need to resynch every minute. It does it anyway, just in case.
Sony Xperia Pro. Reasonable size screen, verreh nice keyboard.
Though I suspect most will reject it based on the fact that Sony make it. Fair enough I suppose...
And nobody is quoting... THAT SONG.
I'm so depressed.
"Watching the sun" is exactly what these stones were built to do. They had to be accurate (or accurate enough) and they had to be permanent in order to provide a known quantity.
The summer solstice wasn't really that important as summer was a time of bountiful supplies of food. Devices like Stone Henge were built to collect the timing of the winter solstice, for both an agricultural and a religious reason.
The agricultural reason was quite simple: they had to have a point from which to count the days until planting began. It was their farmer's almanac and set the seasonal calendar without reliance on the moon.
The religious reason was a little more esoteric. It was the fairly commonly held belief that the winter solstice was the time when life hung in the balance, and not merely in terms of the cold and shortening of food supplies. The days were getting shorter and shorter, the nights getting longer and longer, and there was a very palpable fear that the sun might just decide not to come back next year. They had to know with absolute certainty that the days were getting longer, and they had to know when that change began, in order to time the big week-long celebratory feast. Similar religious practices are found throughout Eurasia, especially in the more northerly areas, and defined much of the form and function of Christmas (and no, before anyone claims it, christianity didn't coopt the old religious practices to trick or ease pagans into converting: converts to the new religion simply carried on their old feasts with new names, to the great dismay of the religious leaders of the time).
This is all well-known and has been for some time. What this particular study has done is directly verify that which was already known from other sources.
Still won't convince all those nellies that thing Stone Henge was built to measure the summer solstice and use it as an excuse to dance around in their underpants, but what can you do?
And now back to my little Florentine adventure. Ho the Medici! I require more culturally attuned steak!
Depends on the size of the shark.
English criminal law used to be entirely about intent. Intent is a very important differentiator between criminal and mistaken behaviour. You can, for instance, be prosecuted for the simple intent to commit certain crimes and rightly so, without ever doing anything more dangerous than gathering the materials necessary to carry out the crime - if you can be proven to actually have that intent.
Even crimes that appear to lack intent, such as manslaughter (for example, killing someone by running them over while driving dangerously) are usually the restful of intent to commit a related action. In the example case, driving dangerously: you choose to commit a potentially criminal act and in the process you cause a death.
Unfortunately the burden of proof for intent is very high, which is why we now have all these laws that criminalise acts without consideration of intent - it makes it much easier to bring prosecutions and bump up the stats, and consequently makes it much easier for politicians and the police to look like they're being tough on crime, when all they're actually doing is criminalising acts that are often either the result of misadventure, or are entirely innocent.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2017