Re: Clothes washing
Hmm. Would you also need carefully balanced counter-rotating washing machine spins so as to avoid also gradually rotating the whole space station in a possibly inconvenient manner? :-)
813 posts • joined 9 Aug 2007
I would guess that the rate of mining remains a small fraction of the total number of coin (to avoid bitflation).
But the other problem is the volatility, which (IMO) has little to to do with the rate of mining, and is instead due to speculation and external shocks to its perceived value and/or utility. I'm not an economist, but I'd have thought you wanted something like the total value transferred in transactions to be overwhelmingly made in very-many, very-small amounts; and that even the biggest transactions remained significantly smaller than this background; and that conversions of other value into or out of bitcoin were similarly distributed.
[died in prison] "for advocating what to him appeared to be the true interests of the people of England."
I happened across the gravestone quite by accident a few decades ago in Sheffield General Cemetery; and have always been impressed by the very careful wording.
In my fairly long experience it's *recent* laptops, not old ones, that have a problem with hardware drivers when installing linux. For a few recent laptops I've had to get a newer kernel, or install the very latest firmware (usually wifi card related), or perhaps tweak the display config. Nothing too demanding, but I imagine more than enough to put off any not-especially motivated windows user, and certainly reasonable grounds for a gripe or two.
But old laptops? I don't ever recall having a problem.
.. at which point you might decide to start with some basics, like here:
The Atlas for the Aspiring Network Scientist
Network science is the field dedicated to the investigation and analysis of complex systems via their representations as networks. We normally model such networks as graphs: sets of nodes connected by sets of edges and a number of node and edge attributes. This deceptively simple object is the starting point of never-ending complexity, due to its ability to represent almost every facet of reality: chemical interactions, protein pathways inside cells, neural connections inside the brain, scientific collaborations, financial relations, citations in art history, just to name a few examples. If we hope to make sense of complex networks, we need to master a large analytic toolbox: graph and probability theory, linear algebra, statistical physics, machine learning, combinatorics, and more.
This book aims at providing the first access to all these tools. It is intended as an "Atlas", because its interest is not in making you a specialist in using any of these techniques. Rather, after reading this book, you will have a general understanding about the existence and the mechanics of all these approaches. You can use such an understanding as the starting point of your own career in the field of network science. This has been, so far, an interdisciplinary endeavor. The founding fathers of this field come from many different backgrounds: mathematics, sociology, computer science, physics, history, digital humanities, and more. This Atlas is charting your path to be something different from all of that: a pure network scientist.
Perhaps not, but if I google/bing/duck that very phrase, I get no useful hits. My own concise oxford dictionary does not have that definition, but "1. relating to morals, treating of moral questions, morally correct, honourable; 2. set of principles of morals, science of morals, moral principles, rules of conduct, whole field of moral science."
If, as I believe you say, your preferred definition, as quoted by you, is from 1789, you do at least to seem to have personally chosen a rather cynical take on an archaic definition ... unless you are about 240 years old, I suppose, which might explain your preference.
I think that if wanted to make a further point here, it would be this: "morally correct" does not imply (only) behaviour only just "moral", or such should be better described as "not immoral"; likewise the words "honourable" or "ethical" do not imply similarly borderline behaviour. It is your apparent choice to say that "ethically" applies only(or at least primarily) to barely ethical or borderline unethical behaviour that strikes me as that of a cynic.
... according to the Cambridge dictionary, is:
"the study of what is morally right and wrong, or a set of beliefs about what is morally right and wrong"
... which I am not sure is the same as your proposed definition (irrespective of how useful the distinction you are making might be).
As I looked out of the window today, at the bright cloudless skies of London, it occurred to me that some part of the Future *was* here. After all, a little way down river, in the vicinity of Tilbury, this was true:
“The sky above the port was the color of television, tuned to a dead channel.”
That is, bright blue :-)
The 'Earth Rocket': a Method for Keeping the Earth in the Habitable Zone
Mark A. Wessels
The Sun is expected to increase its radiant output by about 10% per billion years. The rate at which the radius of the Earth's orbit would need to increase in order to keep the present value of the Sun's radiant flux at the Earth constant is calculated. The mechanical power required to achieve this is also calculated. Remarkably, this is a small fraction (2.3%) of the total solar flux currently intercepted by the Earth. Treating the Earth itself as a rocket, the thrust required to increase the orbit is found, as well as the rate of mass ejection. The Earth has sufficient mass to maintain this rate for several billion years, allowing for the possibility that the Earth could remain habitable to biological life for billions of years into the future.
The speed of light (in its space-time metric/ relativistic sense), is probably best just given the value 1. It's simply the maximum speed allowed by the universe.
Any other amusing numerical values and units given to the speed of light based on cultural mores, perhaps based on archaic unit systems or the like are simply a matter local convenience (or deliberate weirdness) on the part of the user. :-)
Not really - you might like to know there are physicists and mathematicians who very much prefer to write things in entirely coordinate-free notation (perhaps at this point you might look up the definition of a tensor).
We can certainly put coordinate systems of our choosing onto a chosen space (or a spacetime), but how useful this is depends very much on the spacetime and the coordindates (e.g. a black hole spacetime, and the non-trivial process of getting coordinates that work at the event horizon).
Perhaps these days you could ask them to send you a photo of the bar code in place on the wall, so you can "check for its readability in the light conditions" or something. They can either refuse or have to remove the poster themselves, the latter of which might resolve the problem. And if they might be inclined to put the poster back asap, ask for three photos at ten minute intervals, or whatever time it might take for the robot to recover :-)
Terraforming the dwarf planet: Interconnected and growable Ceres megasatellite world
We analyse a megasatellite settlement built from Ceres materials in high Ceres orbit. Ceres is selected because it has nitrogen, which is necessary for an earthlike atmosphere. To have $1 g$ artificial gravity, spinning habitats are attached to a disk-shaped megasatellite frame by passively safe magnetic bearings. The habitats are illuminated by concentrated sunlight produced by planar and parabolic mirrors. The motivation is to have a settlement with artificial gravity that allows growth beyond Earth's living area, while also providing easy intra-settlement travel for the inhabitants and reasonably low population density of 500 /km$^2$. To enable gardens and trees, a 1.5 m thick soil is used. The soil is upgradable to 4 m if more energy is expended in the manufacturing phase. The mass per person is $10^7$ kg, most of which is lightly processed radiation shield and soil. The goal is a long-term sustainable world where all atoms circulate. Because intra-settlement travel can be propellantless, achieving this goal is possible at least in principle. Lifting the materials from Ceres is energetically cheap compared to processing them into habitats, if a space elevator is used. Because Ceres has low gravity and rotates relatively fast, the space elevator is feasible.
What I find often doesn't make an impression is turning disagreements into a confrontation, which typically just tends to end up with everyone staying entrenched in their starting position and not really engaging with the other side.
I'm curious, though. Why do you say to me "your page", when I tried to be very clear that it was nothing to do with me, but just an alternative pov I happened to find, and I rather deliberately did not even claim to believe it. I'm also not sure why a disagreement about the appropriateness of some words seems to have been amplified into the apparently emotive "stealing our language". I guess we just have different strategies for how we approach these things.
Well, rather than just trying to slap the poster down with the mighty force of my righteous wrath -- based solely on a single webpage I happened to find after probably less than a minute of looking -- I thought I might just ask whether they had a good reason for their belief.
This means I can remain polite whilst still directly questioning the reason for their belief, give them a chance to answer and provide whatever reasons they might have in a non-confrontational context, and (even better) not look like a knee-jerk reactionary if it so happens that they *do* have an excellent basis for their assertion. A win all-round, IMO ... but YMMV.
Or, perhaps, the problem is with the humans who don't understand the *actual* question that was asked, they only understand what they *think* they asked. :-)
Remember, your code is not required to do what you want it to to. It only does what you tell it to do (i.e. have coded it to do).
... and now I think of it, I even have my old fx785p, a clamshell thing that was more progammable and even allowed you to work in (its) assembly language ... not sure why it didn't have an exciting large marketing number like the 3600p, given it had more features. And for that, the manual are even in a non-tatty condition ... especially the assembly language one, which saw little use.
It's not as binary as a simple reading of your remark might seem to be implying.
The more accurately you know about position, the less about momentum, and vice versa; but the thing that is bounded is the *product* of the position uncertainty and momentum uncertainty; but fortunately bounded by a number generally regarded as small, i.e. Planck's constant.
I tend to agree, and I think it stands up now if you remember that was way back in 2005 on a probe launched in 1997. Of course, iirc, the Cassini-Huygens video was something of a construct built from not-really-video sources.
MMV, naturally. What seems "best ever" is often dependent on ones age and personal history.
My impression is that a lot of the "audiophile" angle is more about the ceremony of listening, rather than actual the sounds hitting their ears. The idea that everything is set up just-so with high quality components adds to their enjoyment.
For example, I have some very nice drinks glasses. Although I have no expectation that the beverage within actually tastes any different; sitting down and relaxing with a drink from a very nice glass is just generally a more experience pleasant than slugging something down from a generic cylinder whilst in the middle of some household chore. It's not just about the beverage, it's the whole experience package.
Mind you, audiophile pricing is just crazy. Even my nice drinks glasses were less than £10 each. I do find it hard to believe the "ceremony" bonus in listening can really be worth that much. Still, it's their choice.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021