In the parliamentary elections of September 2013, more than 250 000 Norwegians in selected municipalities were able to vote from home. They were taking part in a national trial of Internet voting, building on an advanced cryptographic protocol. Follow the link below for a talk about the technology behind it, presented at the last Chaos Computer Conference by Tor E. BjÃrstad http://media.ccc.de/browse/con...
Going by your UID, I'm guessing you were too young to have been there.
You'd have to guess again.
The age of the square, visible pixel was actually a pretty short period between blurry CRTs and retina LCDs. Pixel art was originally created for CRT, which blurs the pixels. Artists developed techniques to take advantage of this.
In case you need to convey which one of the large updates you downloaded last, you can simply say when you downloaded it. I like it!
That would be the reason for the spinning platform at the bottom of the silo
;-). But maybe it's better to spin down the rocket as it descends so that it stops just as it lands.
The spinning would have to be slow enough that you could either gimbal the nozzle or modulate the thrust at the same frequency as the spinning. I don't know which of the two controls is faster. I don't know about the economics of this. It's probably not economical.
If you offset the fuel pickup from the center, the spinning might possibly increase fuel pressure.
You could have a silo in the ocean too. A heavy one made out of concrete would stay mostly submerged.
A bit of rotation should help to keep the thing upright. The gases being pushed into the silo will be forced towards the walls on their way back out and help center the rocket as it enters the silo. A funnel-shaped silo is easy to hit and provides a soft cushion as the pressure of the backscattered gas increases as the rocket descends into it. Finally, a rotating platform at the bottom needs to be synchronized to the rocket's own rotation. Good Thing I don't have the billions it would take to see my brilliant ideas crash and burn.
I have no such illusions. But I would expect open source tools to at least function equally across FPGA brands, at least to the extent that people are able to reverse engineer the bitstream formats of the various architectures. The quality of software in general correlates strongly with the amount of manpower that is put into it, which again correlates strongly with funding. On that note, I think the case could be made that some FPGA producers would benefit from an open source and cross-platform toolstack, particularly those that are not currently market leaders.
Open standards then, not open source.
There are several open source vhdl / verilog projects, including tools for simulation and synthesis, mapping, placing and routing. Examples: HANA, yosys, Icarus. But I guess you usually get better results with the free-as-in-beer tools from the fpga manufacturers. Which is a shame, since it would be nice to have some open source tools. Although everyone use the same hardware definition languages, it is a pain in the neck to switch between FPGA brands, mostly because the build tools are different and all pretty quirky.
Can you download their schematics and PCB layouts? Not that it would be terribly useful, but it would bring the use of the term "open source hardware" in line with how others use it.
Planting trees is fine, but hardly the best use of your time since trees tend to pop up on their own just fine. If you want to sequester carbon, your time is probably better spent preventing the carbon which has already been bound in existing trees from being released into the atmosphere. For instance by burying a tree in an anaerobic swamp. Less romantic, more effective.