I don't have much problem with Xpolorenet itself, though they do get raked over the coals by those who don't appreciate the nature of satellite service. This '4G Satellite' launched relatively recently with much greater capacity than what's been available before (one shot it doubled north america's total available bandwidth from space), but satellite availability is dependent on 'spot beams' and this 4G one aims mostly at people who will have other options. Most places in Canada where satellite is the only option altogether will be on the telestat satellite, whose traffic management policy is here: http://www.xplornet.com/traffic-management/telesat-ka/

The 3mpbs packages, all except the slowest, were upped to 5mbps in August. Based on the traffic policy link it seems they have also doubled the amount you can transfer before 'recovery mode'. It had actually been getting better, as they have switched as many people as possible onto the new ("4G") satellite, as well as to terrestrial wireless. I can't speak for the new satellite myself, it was never available here, but definitely I'd take reliable low-latency ~500-700kpbs connection with all the ATM overhead over the old-timey telesat 3-5mbps satellite connection which spends most of the time @ 3% (150kbps)!!!

One thing I will give to Xplorenet - despite throttling, there is no caps. That was enough to switch from Telus with their huge overage charges (had one bill in the $1000 range) or later the hard caps (service would cut out entirely at 5GB/mo); If you have a computer system or two with automatic OS updates (or other auto-updating software: i.e., chrome, firefox, flash, java...) and a cloud enabled cell-phone (Android, iOs) or two, a cap dwindles fast should a few updates coincide within a given month.

It's not a deal, just switched to dsl from this. There is a $3-400 setup charge, contracts run typically 3 years, and it's $25/mo or so penalty to break early. Which probably would be okay if you saw those speeds. Have a look at their throttling policy, after 55mb you'll see about 3% of this for the next few hours. Also, many things are blocked or effectively blocked until 2 or 3 am ... Such as Apple authentication servers. If you have say, an Apple TV it won't be able to access iTunes libraries on your Mac due to this. That latency... For something like Slashdot, not an issue, but ads or media streams like Facebook will open hundreds of connections to CDNs to get images etc., which compounds the effect of delay, particularly where multiple DNS resolutions are required. I used an aggressive squid proxy and dnsmasq, both setup with ad filtering to make it useable. The service would be alright for those who live rurally and understand the limits of satellite, but the throttling and filtering of services makes it a viable option only for the most remote and desperate.

In the old days, yes, fuel tanks would be afterwards filled with water and used as ballast, with obvious environmental consequence. There will be a bit of water in ships which use residual fuel, it goes through a seperator before use. Some modern vesssels still mix use fuel and ballast in the same tank to maintain a constant displacement, i.e., naval vessels, though where still done they are seperated by a rubber bladder inside the tank.

Rather than weights, gyroscopes are sometimes used.. the ship will be mostly still, there will still be a small bit of motion and if not done right the non-linear response of the dampened vessel can lead to sea-sickness. Also, it will still heave.

SWATH's make nice boats. The tradeoff is in the narrow hulls down to the pontoons - it's limiting not only from a tankage perspective, but also in terms of arranging the driveline and providing sufficient access. They require a wide footprint to provide adequate stability, and like an oil rig, must be very carefully considered for safety when damaged.

The volume of water will be on order of 2% of the vessels overall weight, so yes it will be a massive amount of weight. Most of the roll-dampening is provided by the hull's natural resistance to roll and the center of mass of the vessel typically being low. This system itself works not by moving the water per-se, but by controlling the natural roll of the water within the U-shaped tank to counteract that motion. By adjusting the air valves, the natural frequency of the tank can be modified (the response curve flattens out). Otherwise, the tanks or combination of tanks are selected to match the natural roll period of the vessel.

They certainly are used used today and practical, though the are also somewhat dangerous if not operated with due regard to their ability to increase a ships chance of capsize. In addition to the anti-roll tanks in the Wikipedia article, there are also 'heeling tanks' - large ballast tanks with oversized bilge pumps used primarily in icebreakers to rock them as they transit through ice, though they are not intended to offset a rolling motion. For a vessel where motion control is imperative, such as a research vessel, two controlled tanks might be fitted to react to a larger range of ships self-displacement and wave frequencies. This can be in addition to what you're more like to see on a yacht - active fin control - as fins require forward speed to be effective, anti-roll tanks do not. The basics of this concept were hashed out pretty well by the 1960's ... though today's control systems are more advanced, can be predicted (rather than reactive) by monitoring the oceans surface, and the reaction of the tank can be better modelled through CFD programs as there is inevitably structural elements through the duct which affect the tanks operation. Having just read the article, no, this is not news. There are commercial outfits who will provide the entire system, turn-key, if the tanks are accounted for in the vessels design.

If you do, my lawyers shall promptly be seeking appropriate compensation.

Actually, it pretty much is - not necessarily a government per se but a body of power at least, which could include social shapers such as religions. Genocide is more than just being racist and killing others, it's a co-ordinated mass attempt at extermination. It requires a lot of funding, logistics, and particularly an extensive build-up of dehumanization of the target group. Which means propagation of such a message by newspaper, radio, television, and/or internet.

A modern day replica will face a huge number of problems trying to achieve even superficial accuracy - all the nice wood paneling is a fire hazard, the glitzy 1st class accommodations were limited, lifeboats won't cut it obviously, can't dump sewage and good luck with practicalities of coal burning and the expectations of a modern passenger... etc. The differences from meeting all the required minimum international regulations would grossly exceed the variations between sister ships.

Mind you now, you're probably safer from sinking on an exact Titanic replica than most modern vessels. The coal bunkers and limits of materials/rivets of the time lent themselves to high levels of subdivision, and the WT bulkheads were carried quite high up - higher than many modern passenger vessels would have their watertight deck. They were well designed, if somewhat utilitarian, boats struck by circumstance rather than endemic flaw.

As an aside, there are a good number of incorrect posts below and a quick read shows some minor problems on the Wikipedia entry for this paper boat as well. I'm a Newfoundlander who enjoys history, a HAM, and a naval architect by trade - so the old Titanic is like a confluence of personal interests. If there are any late comers, I'd be happy to answer any particular questions on the boat - old or the theoretical new.

Ah, well, gross tons would usually refer to a volume measurement - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tonnage

If I recall correctly, the guy on the Californian was told to shag off the wireless so the guy on Titanic could get his messages out earlier in the night. At the time, wireless was used as mobile telegram first, ship information system second - the operators belonged (in this case) to the Marconi company, not to the liner. Spark gaps don't really discriminate frequencies - they had a lot of power, and effectively one channel, so were particularly prone to interference if trying to work the same station.

There are two Matthew's. The one from Bristol had a diesel, and a GPS fitted to one of the masts. Assumedly, it had some level of proper accomodations - though when it arrived in 1997, the tour area was basically just the main deck. Also, being over a decade ago, memory is a little fuzzy. And I've been drinking. The one here in Newfoundland is locally designed and rather more or less accurate for the time, aside from the lumber (locally sourced, except the masts - they are Douglas fir from British Columbia). That boat has, to my knowledge, been to sea once - to film a documentary about the exploration of the Hudson River; a feat which in itself was difficult to arrange, due to insurance concerns. It is kept in Bonavista as a tourist attraction.

Ah, yea. First time seeing this animation, though I do somewhere have the book that goes with said song.

I consider ribbon's as a subset of tabbed toolbar interfaces, which generally follow the Microsoft ribbon guidelines (http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/cc872782.aspx).