Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Get HideMyAss! VPN, PC Mag's Top 10 VPNs of 2016 for 55% off for a Limited Time ×

Comment Re:This is NOT a matter of trademark violation (Score 2) 244

Not necessarily. Take a look at the relevant portion of the Lantham Act. It would have to fit one of the provisions therein. It might make a false suggestion of affiliation, but it's arguable.

15 U.S.C. 1125 - False designations of origin, false descriptions, and dilution forbidden

(a) Civil action

(1) Any person who, on or in connection with any goods or services, or any container for goods, uses in commerce any word, term, name, symbol, or device, or any combination thereof, or any false designation of origin, false or misleading description of fact, or false or misleading representation of fact, which

(A) is likely to cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to deceive as to the affiliation, connection, or association of such person with another person, or as to the origin, sponsorship, or approval of his or her goods, services, or commercial activities by another person, or

(B) in commercial advertising or promotion, misrepresents the nature, characteristics, qualities, or geographic origin of his or her or another person's goods, services, or commercial activities,

shall be liable in a civil action by any person who believes that he or she is or is likely to be damaged by such act.

Comment This is NOT a matter of trademark violation (Score 1) 244

You violate a trademark if you mis-represent a good or service as that of the trademark holder. And it has to be in the same trademark category that they registered. Having a trademark does not grant ownership of a word, and does not prevent anyone else from using that word. Use of a trademark in reporting and normal discussion is not a violation.

Comment Re: drone ship landings require a lot less fuel? (Score 1) 103

I have the front panel of the VAX 11/780 used to render that scene hanging on my wall, but I got to Pixar after that project. This year and last I've contributed some designs that will fly on a FEMA satellite, and a long time ago did a little work to support the Biosciences mission on the shuttle.

Comment Re: drone ship landings require a lot less fuel? (Score 1) 103

You left out astronaut candidate, past president (among other offices) of two L5 chapters, participant in the Citizen's Advisory Council on National Space Policy, and author of a few papers appearing in AIAA publications, among other things.

Still, not bad web surfing for a guy who once helped animate the Genesis simulation sequence in "Wrath of Kahn". ;-)

(Oh, and more than "one-time" unless you mean that in a generic "once and future" sense. Just taking Analog, they've published me at least five times, but it has been a while. I've been focusing on a novel series.)

Cheers,

Comment Re:Moore's Law ended years ago, for many (Score 1) 129

Depending on the specific problem, with number-crunching big databases you may be running into the limits of Amdahl's Law, not Moore's.

If part of the algorithm is inherently serial (ie, can't be parallelized), then that's going to be the bottleneck no matter how many cores you throw at it (although faster memory and I/O may help). CPU clock speed has been stuck around 2-4 GHz for many years now, throwing more transistors at the problem isn't going to help much. What we need there is not more transistors but faster ones, which means moving away from silcon to e.g. GaAs or micro vacuum tubes or whatever. One 1-THz CPU will blow away 250 4-GHz CPUs (memory bandwidth permitting) because it gets around Amdahl's Law.

Submission + - Twitter censors #DNCLeaks trending topic and hashtag (hashtags.org)

bongey writes: Twitter censored the 2nd trending topic DNCLeaks hashtag. The trending hashtag #DNCLeaks was climbing over 90k tweets when it disappeared from the trending topics. It was replaced with PraisinTheAsian(17k) and TheWalkingDead(38k). https://www.hashtags.org/analy... https://www.hashtags.org/analy...
https://www.hashtags.org/analy...

Comment Re: drone ship landings require a lot less fuel? (Score 1) 103

I don't need to stand by the rotation theory. However, the 2.5 degrees that the Earth rotates are about equivalent to the downrange distance.

The first stage is going about 1/5 of the target LEO orbital velocity at separation. While you might well model the trajectory as a parabola over flat ground, given the lack of fuel I would expect that SpaceX puts a lot more care into their trajectory. So far I've failed to attract the attention of the person responsible for Flight Club, the most trusted modeling of SpaceX flights, but I'll message him directly.

Comment Re: drone ship landings require a lot less fuel? (Score 1) 103

Well, Alastair, you should probably not get snotty and ad-hominem, unless you want me to comment on how a one-time sci-fi author and the Unix guy at Dish doesn't really have more authority than the random person one might find in the SpaceX group on Reddit.

It happens there are a few people over there who are rocketry professionals, have the math, and have followed SpaceX long enough. So, sure, their opinion can indeed be trusted.

So far, we have a suggestion from one of the lesser folks there that raising the apogee takes advantage of the Earth's rotation. We'll see if we get the attention of the right people.

Comment Re: drone ship landings require a lot less fuel? (Score 1) 103

Oh, well, if reddit users say it is so, then it must be true. [eye roll]

Argument from authority? Really?

The "east takes you up" phrasing is just a handy mnemonic for epicycles, which are a useful (in some cases) simplification of elliptical orbits (which is what a circular orbit becomes if perturbed). Fairly useless for accurate orbital modelling, or for (significantly) suborbital trajectories. (Both of which apply if you're trying to land a booster on a barge or parking lot.)

Comment Re: drone ship landings require a lot less fuel? (Score 1) 103

Oh really?

Explain highly elliptical (eg cometary) orbits then.

Orbit is a freefall where the horizontal* component of speed at apoapsis is sufficient to avoid hitting the source of gravity at or near periapsis. The first stage booster doesn't come anywhere near fast enough at its apogee.

*horizontal: i.e, perpendicular to a line drawn between the object and the center of gravity of the system.

Slashdot Top Deals

"Necessity is the mother of invention" is a silly proverb. "Necessity is the mother of futile dodges" is much nearer the truth. -- Alfred North Whitehead

Working...