105 posts • joined 17 Jul 2009
If you actually want a vertical launch
And I suspect that the 45-degree angle is better, but one approach would be:
One (or two so it doesn't twist around too easily) balloons at each end
Rocket attached to middle of pole.
Shape something like an H but with the middle of the H being 20-30 metres long and the cross bars only a metre or two each. Then attach a balloon to each corner. Make sure you know how big the balloon will be at launch so they won't meet and you get a vertical launch platform.
The problem is that it's not a stable launch platform, so you still need control surfaces, and the rocket backwash has a <b>much</b> higher chance of trashing the balloon than on a 45-degree launch.
Incidentally, if you're really afraid of trashing payload on the balloon from the backwash, you might be better off with a glide launch to get some separation before firing the rocket.
The original RSA patent on public-key cryptography was really innovative.
Someone (Cerf? Postel?) could probably have patented route discoverability on the internet (that which is now implemented through BGP) - pre-planned routing was the obvious approach (cf NCP).
WIMP interfaces (though Xerox didn't).
Verbatim reports are permitted, the question is whether other reporting is.
A newspaper could run a verbatim report and would have the same protection as Hansard, but if they want to address the question in their own language, paraphrase, edit or in general write their own story, then they may not be protected.
The absolute privilege of parliamentary proceedings is established by the Bill of Rights (1689), and it extends to verbatim reports. Because Hansard consists solely of verbatim reports, it has absolute privilege entire.
Whether a report of parliamentary proceedings has qualified privilege if it's not verbatim (qualified, because it's only privileged if it's a fair and accurate report) is unclear - court reports have exactly that qualified privilege, and it would make sense for parliamentary reports to do so.
Because that privilege exists in common law (ie not defined by statute) and because the question has never been tested in court, no-one can know for certain whether parliamentary reports have QP - it would be expensive to find out.
Get VM to give you a modem
Seriously. Get VM to give you a cable modem not a router, (a DOCSIS 3 modem to be precise) and then go and get your own router. There are a few routers with ethernet interfaces on the internet side that do IPv6. Of course, Virgin don't do IPv6 themselves, which makes this something of a theoretical exercise.
How you vote determines who the candidates are
Not that AV will change anything much, but changing the rules of who wins will decide what sort of people stand - if you want better candidates to vote for, then you need a system where better candidates win and incompetent lying buffoons lose. At the moment, liars win elections, which is why candidates lie.
Of course AV is a quantum leap. That is, it's the smallest possible change to the system.
Space elevator on the moon?
So, precisely how are you proposing to put something into selenostationary orbit in the first place?
I do know of one object that is in such an orbit, but it's a bit impractical as the anchor of a space elevator: Earth.
Or are you planning to go and dump some angular momentum into the moon to make an elevator possible? That would be impressive amounts of energy to burn. We won't be playing pinball with moon-sized objects for a while yet.
Now Mars, sure, you can build an elevator on Mars. In fact, it's possibly the best object in the entire solar system: big mountain to put your anchor on, suitable asteroids already in orbit, reasonable rotational period to put areosynchronous orbit at a sensible height.
Your only real problem is not getting hit by Phobos.
And what's wrong with cock-waving?
Really, we're going into space to prove that we can, which is the purest of cock-waving, of course.
But so what? Lots of us think it's cool to do and enjoy it. Even if it's just entertainment, then it's got value in that. Of course, the entertainment value is a non-excludable good, which is why you can't fund it by selling tickets - but so what, if NASA could sell tickets, they'd find plenty of buyers.
There is a local station (originally RSL) in Manchester, called Channel M. It's on Freeview (channel 200) if you're inside the area.
It covers a big geographical area compared to community radio, has the support of a proper media group (GMG), and a university (Salford) producing programming for free.
And it's still terrible.
That's a best-case scenario for comunity TV.
Any chance of a review of clip-ons?
I can't wear in-ear headphones (not just the in-ear-canal ones, but the basic in-ear ones) but I'd rather not wear something with a headband either.
My current headphones - Sony MDR-Q66 - are about to give up the ghost (the cord-retraction spring gives up eventually) and a review would be nice before I just go and buy the MDR-Q68s.
You haven't read the paper, have you?
Their paths cross the brane stroboscopially, with the period of the stroboscopy dependent on the size of the compactified dimensions (Dimensions 5 and above). The problem is that we can only detect them when they decay, they're comparatively long-lived, and there are two, maybe three detectors in the LHC (and none anywhere else on the planet) that could detect their decays.
They're possibly the worst communications medium ever proposed; they'd make neutrinos look like a reliable, well-chosen carrier.
Enjoyed reading the paper; it stretched parts of my brain I haven't used in a couple of decades.
On this theory
Time travel doesn't involve travellers, but just particles (which, yes, you could use for communication). Since we haven't built a detector for the particles, we can't read the messages yet that we may or may not be getting from the future.
The really neat bit would be to build this into a computer. You could solve any NP-complete problem in the length of time for one trial, as you'd just send back in time a list of the possible solutions tried and failed.
If all of NP is O, then non-quantum crypto is going to be dead. And quantum crypto cannot be applied to most of the crypto problems we have, like encrypting storage media.
Too excited for a title
We could measure the size of the compactified dimensions by the frequency of the stroboscopic intervals in which the time-travelling singlet crosses the brane. That would give us the first experimental confirmation of the existence of those dimensions.
Unfortunately, "These discrete -spatial intervals are likely too small to be discerned" (p.18).
I think you should have read more...
With PAE, a 32-bit operating system can access up to 64GB RAM.
Normal 32-bit processes can only access a 4GB address space, but each process can have it's own 4GB on a PAE computer (this is the same as with a 64-bit computer - Windows x64 gives each process it's own 4GB 32-bit VM) so if you multi-task enough, you can make use of >4GB RAM.
However, a process can use AWE in Windows to access the memory beyond the 4GB limit, as long as it's prepared to do its own memory management.
Linux and Mac OS X enable PAE on just about all computers; Windows only does if you are running Enterprise Edition Server or Datacenter Edition Server - neither Windows Client, nor Windows Standard Edition Server will support PAE beyond the 4GB limit.
Microsoft say that (a) this was a licensing requirement and (b) they found quite a few drivers that blue-screened Windows if there was more than 4GB addressable.
/64 is still much bigger than IPv4.
If you're blocking hacked customer IPs, then going from blocking an IPv4 /32 (single IP) to blocking an IPv6 /64 (home network) is still squaring the problem you have.
Spamhaus' PBL, which lists domestic dynamic IP ranges that aren't supposed to host MTAs, is going to become much more important than their SBL, for example.
Patents should be replicable. If, in order to grant a patent, the applicant had to be able to demonstrate that an expert in the field could build the patented invention, using only the patent, and with no requirement for legal (as distinct from technical) expertise in understanding the patent, then patents would be much less of a problem.
Isn't the point that this *is* the walled garden?
Android has a walled garden - the official app store - but the garden-keepers got it wrong and let apps in that should not have been.
You can choose to leave the walled garden on Android (and you can't on iPhone without jailbreaking) but this is inside the walls.
Where do people get the idea from that this is the court being PC?
Seriously, the European Parliament - which <b>you</b> voted for, or else you didn't vote, which means it's even more your fault - passed the directive. The European Council of Ministers, one of whom is <b>your</b> representative passed it too.
They could go back tomorrow and amend the Directive and the ECJ would have to enforce the amended version. So why haven't you gone to writetothem and written to your elected representatives already?
Android is losing money for everyone - the proceeds of the smartphone/mobile web software market aren't going anywhere because there aren't any proceeds. At all.
At some point Google will come up with a way of monetising it, or they'll just live off the extra ad revenue, or they'll have to abandon Android because they aren't making any money either.
This is the "committee for corporatism" as my University lecturer put it. It's basically just a committee of unions and employers - a bit like NEDC in Britain in the seventies.
It has a legal right to be consulted on various types of legislation that goes through the EU, but all it actually has the power to do if it doesn't like a new directive is to say that it doesn't like it. It doesn't have the power to actually vote it down.
There's another committee with approximately the same (lack of) powers - the Committee of the Regions.
Only if they go through a liquidation
I've been done over that way, but only when it went through Chapter 7 on the way.
Almost any subscription service is technically insolvent, though - they have huge liabilities (obligation to provide future service to paid-up subscribers) and nothing like enough assets to cover them - they will pay the future bills from the subscriptions that come in in the future.
Tell a magazine that they will get no new subscribers or renewals and ask if they can produce the next year's issues until all the subscriptions run out: if they can't they are insolvent.
If they do go through Chapter 7 (bankruptcy) then someone can buy all of the assets and none of the liabilities, cancelling all the future subscriptions.
Anyone remember S&T in 1982?
Who promised you a free trade area?
Really? Someone promised that to you?
I mean "ever closer union" is in the Treaty of Rome, so whoever it was was wrong.
But "we" weren't promised "nothing more than a free trade area" but a federal state, and they can damned well get on with delivering one. Get the bloody national governments out of EU decision-making, that's what I say!
If they actually cared about privacy
It's an easy UI change - when the app requests it, the authorisation screen shows the permissions that the app wants and has "Give them my home address" and "Give them my mobile number" unchecked, so the user has to tick the box to hand over that information.
That way, the default "click through to get it working" workflow would not hand over your details to the application; but would still get the app running.
Can we have a Mark Zuckerberg with devil horns please?
Why not 1920x1080?
ie 1080p resolution, or if they insist on a 4:3 screen, 1920 x 1440 (which would allow for a full-size 1080p video and still some room for on-screen controls).
2048 x 1536 will result in up-scaling artifacts when playing HD video. On a media-consumption device, I'd have thought that 1080p video would be the main selling-point of improving the resolution.
Read Clark on pentaborane. They called it "Green Dragon" because, well the flames were green and it ate people.
There is a superb article at http://www.scribd.com/doc/15062569/Pentaborane-Taming-the-Dragonpdf about getting rid of the stuff - they stored it for decades because they couldn't come up with a safe way of disposing of it without an explosion.
China has more borders than their Eastern one.
To the South and Southwest lies India, a country they've already had one shooting war with, and the host for the Dalai Lama - obviously being supported to try to subvert Chinese control over Tibet.
To the North and Northwest is Russia, another country they've already had a shooting war with.
Improving their military capabilities vis-a-vis these is a far more attainable goal than butting heads with the USA.
Also, China's military budget might be small, but the Renminbi is artificially held low, so the money is worth more than the nominal value - and the low wages and prices in China means that the same money goes a lot further; you get a lot more soldiers and airmen to the yuan than you do to the dollar - which means you have more left after salaries to pay for R&D.
Sure there's some time left. So plan now.
When IANA is depleted - and I'd guess at February too, the RIRs will (by definition) all have at least one full /8 and a fractional /8. That will last several months for even the busiest (like APNIC, ARIN and RIPE) and AfriNIC and LANIC should last a bit longer than the other three.
Even when the RIRs are out, the LIRs (ie ISPs) will have blocks still to allocate to customers, so you're not likely to phone up an ISP and be told "sorry, we're full" until the back-end of 2012.
Still, what that does is it gives you two years from now to have your IPv6 transition planned, costed, and ready to implement.
There will be people who can only access the internet via IPv6 or 6to4 proxies by 2013 or 2014 at the latest. If you're an AS then you should be aiming for IPv6 by then - 6to4 proxies are going to be a pig.
[Oh, how I wish that the IPv4 space had been allocated a block in IPv6 and routers were required to down-convert packets; the transition would be so much easier]