Re: I feel the good in you
Edge has to be best at blocking the clingy sites; It's the primary attack surface.
3129 posts • joined 28 Oct 2009
“The galaxy we found is a clear counter-example of that, where it seems to have dark matter behaving in the normal way, as it does in the present-day universe.”
As I understand it, current theories of galaxy formation need dark matter in the primordial mix to work well, but the earlier studies found DM was lacking in the first three billenia, and this fact is vexxing. The theory has a big hole in it.
Now someone has found a galaxy, almost old enough to be classed in that era, that has plenty of DM. That's very interesting, but how does this discovery negate the problem presented by the other old galaxies they found lacking DM? The article seems to imply this find fixes the DM theory problem, but does it really?
Edge will be just a mask for Chrome, and Microsoft has stated they have discontinued bad old Internet Exploder, and will finally end all official support for it when Win 10 ends its support cycle.
So, at long last, my ancient enemy's days are numbered. It will be strange not to have IE to kick around anymore...
> "Everything else is a toss up."
I'd be very surprised if the body of the rocket (basically big lightweight fuel tanks with perhaps a thin aluminum skin) would survive such strong sudden area loading from one side without major warping at the least.
BTW, in the video the rocket does an interesting thing just before splashdown. First it tilts a bit to acquire some side velocity, then swings to the opposite tilt just before entering the water. This has the effect of making the booster fall one way while pushing its tail thru the water the other way (slightly).
I guess it's to reduce the toppling speed, softening the blow from the water surface on the side of the rocket. Maybe this is why the whole thing is so intact, letting Musk muse about reusing it.
Wait, that would mean the neighbors get an eyeful every time the fern gets water (assuming the fern is not too large). Umm, how would it be if a bunch of like-minded neighbors got together and hired a stark nekkid fern botherer's breezy services, to be rotated between them in turn? Talk about gaming the system!
> "From a cops perspective, that sounds like a perfect catch-22."
In theory, yes, but any ticket less than ten MPH over will generally be dropped by judges, and the cops know this. The de facto "speed limit" is now ambiguous and open to subjective interpretation, but the law does allow cops to write you up anyway if in their opinion you were driving at an "unsafe speed," regardless of your actual speed. Thus the stated limit is more of a guideline anyway.
The trick is to stay in the flow, which generally is well over the limit much of the time, except when traffic is heavy, which is most of the time.
> "He is simply a broker."
More correctly, he is a fence. People's stuff gets stolen, and the theves sell it to the fence, who re-sells it at a profit. The only difference with a traditional fence is that this stolen data, not money or objects, and is usually worthless to anyone but the victim. Still, it is reselling stolen goods at a profit.
Predicted super high speed internet. So far all we have is talk, and that's cheap. I prefer not to assume predictions are guaranteed to happen, unlike some others here.
Perhaps in the next few years China really will do what they're claiming, while the hapless US falls far, far behind. But don't hold your breath.
> "There is plenty of original material for Sci Fi."
Sure is, but two things get in the way. One is that "Sci Fi" has been flooding the market for some time now, and most of that flood is just the usual plot gumbo, with lasers. That's what the public thinks Sic Fi is.
The other thing is that real Science Fiction is unsettling and confusing to a lot of movie goers. It may be fine for discerning readers, but the usual film crowd doesn't want to think too much. It's scary, and not in a good way.
Spandex heroes are safe, and pretty much guarantee at least some decent return on investment. Sigh fi...
> "I'd be awfully surprised if Aldous Huxley hadn't read "The Power of Propaganda"..."
Aren't all successful fiction writers really propagandists themselves? The only difference is that they freely admit what they are doing up front by calling it "fiction," which helps with the whole byline thing too.
NN was not imposed via the courts, or by Congress. It was imposed by the Executive via executive orders. These EO's are essentially by fiat, and are thus vulnerable to removal by fiat. However, now part of the judiciary is attempting to override the second fiat, based on a subjective determination that said fiat was not "well reasoned" or some such, while supposedly the first one was.
It's a purely partisan battle over policy, nothing more. Majorities and voting have little to do with it.
> "plus doesn't windows 10 have it baked in?"
Doesn't appear to be "baked in" to Win10 at all. I did a quick google, and Flash seems to be simply installable, just as with other OS's. Also, two years ago MS was pulling the Edge browser back from Flash specifically, so they are aware of the Flash issues too.
You're suggesting that in future people won't have any control over any aspect of their personal transport except for where it goes. Plenty of SF written along those lines, BTW.
I suppose it's inevitable. Cars are big hurtling objects, full of legal liabilities. Underwriting such large risks affordably requires full control over the whole process.
Why fight it? The bean counters will win, if only by outlasting the rest of us. And once everything is properly maintained according to spec, it's only a minor step to an autonomous car requirement, once the associated risks are reduced to a reasonable level.
My SciFi reader childhood wants to "thumbs-up" the whole thing, but the shadetree mechanic in me wants to blow it all up. What to do, what to do...
> "The FCC"s remit ends at the US borders."
Even inside the borders its remit is not unbounded. If the FCC can move into space debris regulating, then it can also enforce any rules it wishes about earthly infrastructure planning and construction.
I thought their remit was supposed to be concerning spectrum and so forth. Launches are a transport issue, not anything to do with spectrum. Looks like an agency power grab was stopped cold. Is that so bad? I'm not against regluating space junk, but the FCC isn't the correct agency to do it, no matter what they had planned.
> "Now if we knew every planet and celestial body floating around the star then we could use gravity to show down instead..."
No we can't. Such a high-speed probe would not be close to any large mass long enough to dump a significant amount of velocity. Maybe its path would be bent slightly, but that's all.
BTW, obligatory Banard-related XKCD (published 22 Oct, 2018!)
> "Since they are all fast for the 30 seconds you will test obviously Sprint is not to blame!"
Just as a hypothetical, what if they discovered that the average vid call user only really looks at the image during the onset of the call, and thereafter spends more time parsing voice and merely using the vid for non-verbal clues? Given that, it might be acceptable (for them) to throttle later in the call and still not get complaints.
> "But is velocity still a Constant in these circumstances?"
Averaged across the entire orbit, yes. Some of that total velocity does get transferred to Venus tho, in order to shorten the orbital period and do more science faster. The Venus passes also help to sharpen the ellipse, which gets the spacecraft closer to the Sun without needing lots of delta-v. The elongated orbit also lets the probe communicate between passes, and limits the time spent close to the Sun, reducing wear and tear.
If there is a galactic community out there, they would have to have rules forbidding contact with races that haven't yet developed the ability to cross between stars, or else they'd be here already. I bet those rules specifically state that deliberate electromagnetic attempts at contact don't count, no matter how earnest the signaling.
But I'm sure they'd be extremely interested and would pay close attention to whatever we send out...
You're way ahead of me. First, we message them with a broad beam, saying we know they are listening. Then we taunt them mercilessly, using our most battle-hardened trolls, for years if necessary!
Even if they still refuse to respond, it will be fun for everyone. >:-)
> "This bill and all others are fluff."
I disagree. Wyden is a loyal Democrat, but he's smart and sees that soon the Republicans will start to legislate these issues, reining in the tech giants, particulary if they hold onto the House. He would prefer to control and limit that conversation, thus his current proposal.
> "But the fissionables aren't "dead mass" they are fuel mass."
No, the fissionables are used to heat and/or accelerate the reaction mass, in theory anyway. Jettisoning your power supply out the tailpipe is a really bad idea, particularly if it's radioactive and you're still in the atmosphere.
Nuclear rockets are all well and good, but what actually matters is exhaust velocity. For a hydrogen/oxygen rocket it's about 4,400 meters per second at the nozzle. For an ion engine it's about 29,000 M/S. So ion engines have far more total impulse than chem rockets ever will.
Nuclear rockets may have a larger flow rate, but I doubt the exhaust velocity will be any higher that with ion engines (if that), and they will have to accelerate much more dead mass in the form of fissionables.
Perhaps for large payloads already in space it could be acceptable if exhaust velocity is high enough to more than offset the dead mass. Kinda like a large-scale equivalent of the ion engine's efficiency.
> "Why are registrars still publishing this info anyway?"
Good question.I went wiki on this, and it seems that once upon a time, all WHOIS info was held on a single server run by DARPA. It was set up to allow even wildcard searches! Loose as a goose.
That was apparently fine when the entire Internet could have met in one building, but now it's at least a million times larger. WHOIS outlived its desirability long ago, but inertia retards reform.
Well Version 1.0, I've read that speech and it basically says that corporations that directly service the government can become a big problem if not watched for signs of bribery toward politicians. Ike was quite correct about that!
But I didn't see anything in the speech about upping corporate tax rates to fix the potential bribery problem. In fact, raising taxes on military contractors more or less automatically raises their rates, thus churning the tax funds around to no purpose, unless you count "shrinkage" along the way as a purpose.
> "The Republicans treat the people of the US as a piggy bank."
So when big government types raise taxes, that's the opposite of taking the people's money away? Oh right, this is about taxing corporations, not the people.
Except, corporations never pay tax. All taxes levied on them are paid out of profits. So if the government takes a bigger bite, they must raise rates to cover it or go bankrupt, thus passing the tax on to their customers, the people.
Conversely, if corporate taxes are reduced then they generally reduce rates too, because if they don't and their competitors do, their market share tanks.
So in either case it's the high corporate tax crowd that are doing the piggy bank thing, and they are rarely Republicans. Democrats are the ones who want to "stick it to the corporations," which actually adds tax burden to the people, but not in an obvious way.
> "...as soon as you get a democrat government in the excited $tates."
Funny you should talk that way. FYI, the conservative part of the US has gradually become aware that the tech giants are almost entirely in the hands of very liberal Democrats. We don't like how those platforms are being gradually weighted against us for purely PC reasons. We're gradually coming to realize we can't let the online social sphere's rules be dictated by those who would be happy to stifle us, leaving the field to the Left only.
And here you come saying that it would be good to put controls on those tech giants, but only if a Democrat gets to do it. Why do I suspect this is so that the process can be made entirely for show, with no real reform at all?
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2018