Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Spoilers! (Score 1) 55

Like it spoiled much of anything if you watch the movie. It certainly isn't something like telling people Luke is Darth Vader's son or that Princess Leia is his sister (which really makes watching Star Wars episode IV sort of awkward in some scenes).

I just want to see how many times Matt Damon drops the f-bomb in the movie? Andy Weir uses it about a dozen times in the first chapter and is even the first word of the book.

Comment Re:So what? (Score 1) 146

Which only means that it is pretty well cleansed due to the debate and non-controversial things have been kept out. It is interesting that the alias used by Barack Obama while his family lived in Indonesia, Barry Soetoro, is not listed anywhere in the actual article even though it is even mentioned in one of the sources on the article as the title of the article. Another interesting thing that has been completely removed from not only that article but any sub-articles is anything even remotely mentioning the "birther" debate... as if that never happened at all and never appeared in any headlines or discussions even to have it refuted. Again, links to articles that list that debate are even in the sources, just no mention in the actual article itself is what I find odd.

I agree it is pretty clean with just facts, but it is a pretty cleansed set of facts that are non-controversial in and of themselves and state the dull dry stuff that doesn't get dredged up when real muck racking happens. It is also an extremely orthodox view of Barack Obama.

Mind you, for something like Wikipedia, I think it is likely about as good as it can get. But 80 pages of discussion debates shows it was a highly contentious article for those who helped put together the words you are currently reading there. It also appears to have the usual level of cranks and crazy folks who have edited the page over time, like the guy who replaced the whole article with the word "Gay". It likely would be mostly what you would also see in a typical encyclopedia of even 50 years ago about a similar topic written by professional authors writing for an encyclopedia.

Comment Re:Not bad in principle (Score 1) 146

The way you solve that problem is to require reviewers to not hide in anonymity. There are plenty of very prominent reviewers of all kinds of things, including the movie reviewers Gene Siskel & Roger Ebert who got their named plastered all over so much that even a negative review ("Two thumbs interesting movie with flaws") would still show up on movie posters.

Don't trust an individual reviewer.

Comment Re:socks arent all malevolent (Score 1) 146

more attention needs to be lent to dealing with controversial articles on the RIAA, the trans continental partnership, and the nature of large entities that can afford to muddle their tracks. For example, how many edits to the Coca Cola wiki article have been made and by whom? What edits get made to pages on the gulf oil disaster and on Time Warners article

And you don't think pages like Barack Obama or George W. Bush are immune to these problems by political fanatics either? What about the religious fanatics that get into edit wars over theology, or the Wikipedia pages on Scientology? Frankly what I see for from these shills working for advertising agencies is trivial compared to the huge damage that a well invested fanatic on many other topics can do to Wikipedia articles, most of them not getting any sort of pay for their activities.

It also isn't the famous articles that are the real concern though. It is the articles that have perhaps two or three active editors that have ever worked on that article and then the article is hijacked to support a strong point of view. It might get caught if it is on somebody's active page watch list or somebody aggressively looking at recent changes, but mostly it will slip through the cracks and become mostly permanent to Wikipedia. This includes some rather substantive articles I might add, but by its nature is usually non-controversial (hence why so few people are bothering to edit it too).

Comment Re:Irony (Score 1) 146

That edit history is already built into the MediaWiki software and has been there for years. it is in fact one of the ways you can track down the activities of a user, and that edit history is for the most part even available to the general public. Here is the edit history of one of the more infamous Wikipedia editors of the past as an example.

Admins get some minor additional pieces of information, and can look up deleted pages (at least pages not visible to everybody) to review what might have happened in the past that got them on the bad side of another administrator or even police bad actions by admins themselves. It is tedious for even one admin to fight another admin (called wheel warring) but it can be done.

Your suggestion already exists.

Comment Re:Premature much? (Score 1) 24

We have more than enough beautiful drawings and pie in the sky dreams, these do not advance the end goal of having and regularly using cheap manned access to space.

These guys are not just making beautiful drawings, and I fail to see how they are not advancing the end goal of having regular and cheap crewed access to space.

I don't know what their end goal actually is, assuming they can actually put capsules into space. I think that issue is something which legitimately needs to be brought up. There is a history of some "open source projects" (Gracenote comes to mind) where once a pile of money starts flowing and the project gets on a firm footing financially that the volunteers get left behind in the dust. The Wikimedia Foundation is another such project that isn't quite so bad, but Jimmy Wales definitely could have completely sold out the community in the past and definitely did in some ways too so far as there are some people making a huge pile of money off of Wikipedia content, even if indirectly.

I don't mind the fact that Kristian Von Bengston is dreaming big. We need that in this universe, where people who dream big can actually accomplish things. If he tries and fails, he is but one more person who has definitely been in that situation before. Jim Benson was another such dreamer in commercial spaceflight that tried and failed.... but provided the groundwork for others to follow that really did help. I could name a great many others that can definitely fit in that list, including I might add Werner Von Braun..... who even got his start from Hermann Oberth if you want to follow an interesting engineering pedigree. We won't get into space without folks like this. I'll even say that Kristian Von Bengston is leading a resurgance of private spaceflight for the European Union, which I find awesome in so many ways for just that point too.

And the really amazing thing is that Copenhagen Suborbitals is doing all of this with very minimal amounts of tax dollars involved. There is a sort of libertarian side of me that is just screaming "He gets it!" on that point too. This could be a huge government boondoggle with pork flowing all over the EU as yet another ESA project for going to the Moon or something like that. Instead, it is private money that is paying for the bulk of what is going on, even if it is donations. That by itself is proof of some significant support for spaceflight

Comment Re:Holy Jebus (Score 1) 220

It is one thing to use such techniques to test something in a quiet area like a testing chamber, and something completely different to use this technique not only in a rocket that is accelerating at 32 m/s^2 but also has a whole bunch of other noise going on from nine operating turbo pumps, the rocket engines themselves, and other things rattling around tied to that whole system. In addition, to be able to locate a cause while the whole rocket is undergoing massive unplanned disassembly (aka an explosion releasing as much energy as a small nuclear bomb). Also doing that remotely off of recordings made on less than ideal microphones sharing bandwidth with many other more critical data functions over 30 miles away from where you are at.

As something SpaceX can and perhaps should be doing as a part of their Q/A analysis, no doubt using some sort of sound probing to detect faults is going to be done. I just don't know if this has been done on something like a black box of an airliner to perform fault analysis post-mortem on a vehicle failure.

Submission SpaceX Falcon 9 CRS-7 Failure: Broken Strut on Helium Tank->

Teancum writes: In a press conference held by SpaceX CEO Elon Musk, he released some findings about what caused the explosion of the launch vehicle carrying the CRS-7 Dragon spacecraft on its way to the International Space Station.

Apparently a Helium tank was held in place inside of the Liquid Oxygen tank on the 2nd stage that failed while it was under going the nearly 32 m/s^2 acceleration (about 3.2 time Earth's gravity acceleration). This part was manufactured by an undisclosed 3rd party contractor for SpaceX and was rated to being able to hold up to 10,000 PSI, but failed at 2000. In the past week, SpaceX has been "testing an enormous number" of this exact strut that is currently in their inventory intended for future flights, and confirmed that at least one of them failed in a similar fashion where metallurgical analysis has been performed trying to identify potential defects.

It was also confirmed in this press conference that the SpaceX Dragon spacecraft was tracked after the explosion and remained intact until it could no longer be followed by the tracking station due to it falling below the horizon. The Dragon could have survived the explosion and been recovered, except that the on-board guidance computer was not programmed to deploy the parachute during ascent. In the future, SpaceX plans on having this parachute deployment as a standard procedure even on cargo missions in the event of a rocket failure.

Link to Original Source

Comment Re:What could possible go wrong? (Score 5, Informative) 120

I'd like you to point out any launch site for orbital rockets that is anywhere even remotely close to tall buildings or even aircraft flights? The FAA routinely makes a pretty large exclusion zone around any launch activity. With the recent launch disasters from SpaceX and Orbital-ATK, I think such warnings should be well heeded even for ordinary Kerosene fueled rockets, much less something with an exotic propulsion system like this. It sure isn't going to be launched out of Central Park or any other urban center.

Besides, the CEO addressed this specific issue in an interview recorded a few months ago. Not only is the launch going to be far from cities, it will also need to happen in an arid region in part due to the microwave power being absorbed by water in the atmosphere. In other words, it is likely that this won't be launched from KSC in Florida either.

Comment Re:Better get those lobbyists ready, Comcast (Score 1) 98

When Comcast is looking as a wonderful alternative to me right now compared to the absolutely miserable experience I have with Century Link, I can see at least for my community that this will indeed be some realistic competition for terrestrial ISPs. All they have to beat is $100 per month for more than 800 kilobits/s of service to be economically viable for my family.

Yes, where I live internet service is that crappy. The data gets through, but it is insanely slow and often is far less than 800 kilobits in terms of typical bandwidth... so much so that even dial-up modems seem to have more throughput. I don't exactly live in a major metro area, but it is still a minor city with a population of about 200k people that has fiber optic links into the area that can sustain much higher bandwidth to ordinary households than currently is the case.

I am pretty certain that these terrestrial carriers will be finally upgrading their equipment and be competitive once these alternative networks start to become common place as well.

Comment Re:Fuck the FCC (Score 1) 98

And it is through the International Telecommunications Union (ITU) that most countries coordinate the usage of global spectrum usage. This includes the USA, particularly with regards to almost anything having to do with spaceflight where you have spectrum usage that crosses international boundaries... like will most definitely happen in the case of this satellite constellation.

In the USA, you work through the FCC to make those ITU filings though.

Comment Re:4000 (Score 3, Interesting) 98

I'd wager that financial market trading traffic alone could pay for a significant portion of this bill at super premium rates, especially overseas traders. Not to mention traffic from ships, planes, rural 1st world locations all paying a premium. They can implement zone pricing pretty easily because they will always be able to able to triangulate a transmission down to the inch. With a network that dense it would greatly surpass the accuracy of the existing GPS constellation.

I had not thought of that idea before in terms of a potential customer for this set-up. That is an excellent point. Iridium could have been used for something like this (which also has a digital data component), but given the technology capabilities available at the time Iridium was being built, they could only get about 4800 baud for individual customers... something that makes the bandwidth latency sort of irrelevant. High bandwidth and low latency combined with global coverage would indeed be a good customer.

The major competitor to this concept in that regard is an even older technology though, mainly the 19th Century concept (updated to using 21st Century materials) of the cable laying ship. An awful lot of fiber cable has been laid down across all of the oceans of the world between major cities. It is only when you can't access that fixed terrestrial network that something of this nature really becomes useful (as you've mentioned).

As a means to deliver that last mile architecture, it really opens up possibilities.

We want to create puppets that pull their own strings. - Ann Marion