Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.misc > #1518 > unrolled thread

Imagine a geodesic rotating array of orbiting servers

Back to article view | Back to comp.misc

Contents

  Imagine a geodesic rotating array of orbiting servers RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2014-03-12 14:29 +0000
    Re: Imagine a geodesic rotating array of orbiting servers Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> - 2014-03-13 14:21 -0700
      Re: Imagine a geodesic rotating array of orbiting servers Andy Burns <usenet.feb2014@adslpipe.co.uk> - 2014-03-13 22:47 +0000
        Re: Imagine a geodesic rotating array of orbiting servers Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> - 2014-03-13 15:50 -0700
          Re: Imagine a geodesic rotating array of orbiting servers Rich <rich@example.com> - 2014-03-14 01:43 +0000
          Re: Imagine a geodesic rotating array of orbiting servers greymausg <maus@mail.com> - 2014-03-14 11:55 +0000
          Re: Imagine a geodesic rotating array of orbiting servers RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2014-03-14 19:35 +0000
            Re: Imagine a geodesic rotating array of orbiting servers Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> - 2014-03-14 13:24 -0700
              Unison RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2014-03-14 21:52 +0000
                Re: Unison RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2014-03-15 14:57 +0000
                  Re: Unison Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> - 2014-03-16 18:16 -0700
                    Re: Unison RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2014-03-17 11:31 +0000
                      Re: Unison Dag-Erling Smørgrav <des@des.no> - 2014-03-17 13:32 +0100
                        Re: Unison RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2014-03-17 13:32 +0000
                          Re: Unison Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-03-17 17:57 +0000
                            Re: Unison Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-03-17 18:19 +0000
                            Re: Unison Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> - 2014-03-17 20:01 +0000
                              Re: Unison Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-03-17 21:15 +0000
                                Re: Unison Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> - 2014-03-17 21:29 +0000
                                  Re: Unison Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-03-17 21:37 +0000
                              Re: Unison Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-03-18 15:20 +0000
                                Re: Unison Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> - 2014-03-18 19:14 +0000
                                  Re: Unison Rob Myers <rob@robmyers.org> - 2014-03-18 20:01 +0000
                                  Re: Unison Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-03-18 23:11 +0000
                              Re: Unison Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-03-19 22:18 +0100
                                Re: Unison Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-03-19 23:14 +0100
                                Re: Unison Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-03-19 23:04 +0000

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#1518 — Imagine a geodesic rotating array of orbiting servers

From the "call it SkyNet and I kill you" department

What if you launched a fleet of small, thin, servers into orbit where they are powered by infinite solar energy and cooled in space?  What would that look like?

http://server-sky.com/

Interesting clip:

"Server Sky thinsats are ultralight aluminum foil substrates that
convert sunlight into computation and communications. Powered by solar
cells, propelled and steered by light pressure, networked and located
by microwaves, and cooled by radiation into deep space. Arrays of tens
of thousands of thinsats act as highly redundant computation and
database servers, as well as phased array antennas to reach thousands
of transceivers on the ground. First generation Version 5 thinsats are
20 centimeters across (about 8 inches) and 0.04 millimeters (40
microns) thick, and weigh 3 grams. They can be mass produced with
off-the-shelf semiconductor and display technologies. Thousands of
radio chips provide intra-array, inter-array, and ground communication,
as well as precise location information. Thinsats are launched stacked
by the thousands in solid cylinders, shrouded and vibration isolated
inside a traditional satellite bus."


-- 
RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com>

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1558

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On 2014-03-12 14:29:38 +0000, RS Wood said:

> From the "call it SkyNet and I kill you" department
> 
> What if you launched a fleet of small, thin, servers into orbit where 
> they are powered by infinite solar energy and cooled in space?  What 
> would that look like?
> 
> http://server-sky.com/
> 
> Interesting clip:
> 
> "Server Sky thinsats are ultralight aluminum foil substrates that
> convert sunlight into computation and communications. Powered by solar
> cells, propelled and steered by light pressure, networked and located
> by microwaves, and cooled by radiation into deep space. Arrays of tens
> of thousands of thinsats act as highly redundant computation and
> database servers, as well as phased array antennas to reach thousands
> of transceivers on the ground. First generation Version 5 thinsats are
> 20 centimeters across (about 8 inches) and 0.04 millimeters (40
> microns) thick, and weigh 3 grams. They can be mass produced with
> off-the-shelf semiconductor and display technologies. Thousands of
> radio chips provide intra-array, inter-array, and ground communication,
> as well as precise location information. Thinsats are launched stacked
> by the thousands in solid cylinders, shrouded and vibration isolated
> inside a traditional satellite bus."

"Server Sky is speculative. The most likely technical showstopper is 
radiation damage. The most likely practical showstopper is 
misunderstanding. Working together, we can fix the latter."

I'm not so sure if I'm going to be working together without pay!  Hah.  
The radiation seems like a difficult problem to solve with their 
current design idea.  To shield electronics from radiation in the deep 
of space, you need to shield them and aluminum is actually worse than 
nothing for this purpose.  Another issue I see is commincation with the 
ground stations.  Their site features a stereotypically hopeful 
photograph of some sari-clad women gazing at a smartphone, so my guess 
is that they are angling for some government third-world development 
grants.

Though their idea is somewhat to totally impractical, I have often 
pondered orbital computing as a possible future angle.  With the 
correct radio bands, space to ground communication can be quite 
reliable and low power can be used.  I can communicate using amateur 
radio satellites on 5w of power or even less without particularly 
sophisticated equipment.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1564

Oregonian Haruspex wrote:

> This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
> Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1

+--------------------+
|     Down with      |
| this sort of thing |
+--------+-+---------+
          | |
          | |
          | |
          | |
          | |
          | |
          +-+

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1565

On 2014-03-13 22:47:02 +0000, Andy Burns said:

> Oregonian Haruspex wrote:
> 
>> This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
>> Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1
> 
> +--------------------+
> |     Down with      |
> | this sort of thing |
> +--------+-+---------+
>           | |
>           | |
>           | |
>           | |
>           | |
>           | |
>           +-+

Not sure how that happened.  My message was text only.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1570

Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On 2014-03-13 22:47:02 +0000, Andy Burns said:

> > Oregonian Haruspex wrote:
> > 
> >> This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
> >> Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1
> > 
> > +--------------------+
> > |     Down with      |
> > | this sort of thing |
> > +--------+-+---------+
> >           | |
> >           | |
> >           | |
> >           | |
> >           | |
> >           | |
> >           +-+

> Not sure how that happened.  My message was text only.

Unison/2.1.10 probably stupidly converted your text only message into html.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1589

On 2014-03-13, Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On 2014-03-13 22:47:02 +0000, Andy Burns said:
>
>> Oregonian Haruspex wrote:
>> 
>>> This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
>>> Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1
>> 
>> +--------------------+
>> |     Down with      |
>> | this sort of thing |
>> +--------+-+---------+
>>           | |
>>           | |
>>           | |
>>           | |
>>           | |
>>           | |
>>           +-+
>
> Not sure how that happened.  My message was text only.
>

Permission to borrow?.


-- 
maus
 .
  .
...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1610

On 2014-03-13, Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On 2014-03-13 22:47:02 +0000, Andy Burns said:
>
>> Oregonian Haruspex wrote:
> Not sure how that happened.  My message was text only.

I also notice from the headers you posted it using Unison, which is a
good newsreader.  I've got it too at home - I'll have to experiment in
some test group to see if I can get it to post some HTML, just as a
lark.  

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1619

On 2014-03-14 19:35:41 +0000, RS Wood said:

> On 2014-03-13, Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> On 2014-03-13 22:47:02 +0000, Andy Burns said:
>> 
>>> Oregonian Haruspex wrote:
>> Not sure how that happened.  My message was text only.
> 
> I also notice from the headers you posted it using Unison, which is a
> good newsreader.  I've got it too at home - I'll have to experiment in
> some test group to see if I can get it to post some HTML, just as a
> lark.

I like everything about Unison except two things.  First, it sometimes 
mixes articles from two or more recently clicked threads at random, and 
second, it seems to occasionally eat a whole CPU until you kill it and 
restart.  Other than that it's great.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1622 — Unison

On 2014-03-14, Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On 2014-03-14 19:35:41 +0000, RS Wood said:
>
>> On 2014-03-13, Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> On 2014-03-13 22:47:02 +0000, Andy Burns said:
>>> 
>>>> Oregonian Haruspex wrote:
>>> Not sure how that happened.  My message was text only.
>> 
>> I also notice from the headers you posted it using Unison, which is a
>> good newsreader.  I've got it too at home - I'll have to experiment in
>> some test group to see if I can get it to post some HTML, just as a
>> lark.
>
> I like everything about Unison except two things.  First, it sometimes 
> mixes articles from two or more recently clicked threads at random, and 
> second, it seems to occasionally eat a whole CPU until you kill it and 
> restart.  Other than that it's great.
>

Weird, I never had either of those problems, but YMMV.  Other
alternatives on MacOSX tend to be converted Carbon apps, with no unicode
support (MT-Newswatcher, Pineapple, Hogwasher).  Unison may have
problems but it's better than the alternatives.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1639 — Re: Unison

On 2014-03-14 21:52:49 +0000, RS Wood said:

I was able to replicate it on Unison 2.1.10.  The only way I could get 
it to post multipart was to open a new post in Unison, then paste into 
it some text I'd written elsewhere (in this case, I copied some 
colorful stuff from a Pages document).  Unison flashed me a warning 
message: will have to convert to Rich Text in order to preserve 
formatting.  I accepted it, and resulting post was multipart.

Starting a post in Unison defaulted to plain text.

Curiosity sated, if nothing else.  Have a good Saturday!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1699 — Re: Unison

On 2014-03-15 14:57:28 +0000, RS Wood said:

> On 2014-03-14 21:52:49 +0000, RS Wood said:
> 
> I was able to replicate it on Unison 2.1.10.  The only way I could get 
> it to post multipart was to open a new post in Unison, then paste into 
> it some text I'd written elsewhere (in this case, I copied some 
> colorful stuff from a Pages document).  Unison flashed me a warning 
> message: will have to convert to Rich Text in order to preserve 
> formatting.  I accepted it, and resulting post was multipart.
> 
> Starting a post in Unison defaulted to plain text.
> 
> Curiosity sated, if nothing else.  Have a good Saturday!

I think we can blame the overly-helpful clipboard of OS X as much as we 
can blame Unison.  Part of the problem may lie in OS X's assumption 
that everybody should be able to read Unicode.  Might be wishful 
thinking - after all, Unicode was finalized just recently, in 1992.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1715 — Re: Unison

On Sun, 16 Mar 2014 18:16:00 -0700
Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> wrote:

> I think we can blame the overly-helpful clipboard of OS X as much as we 
> can blame Unison.  Part of the problem may lie in OS X's assumption 
> that everybody should be able to read Unicode.  Might be wishful 
> thinking - after all, Unicode was finalized just recently, in 1992.

Or rather, that "Rich Text" is as "low" as you should go.  OSX seems to
prefer RichText as a lowest common denominator, which for most
purposes, is probably correct and even helpful.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1716 — Re: Unison

RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> writes:
> Or rather, that "Rich Text" is as "low" as you should go.  OSX seems
> to prefer RichText as a lowest common denominator, which for most
> purposes, is probably correct and even helpful.

The lowest common denominator is always 1 (for numbers) or plain text
(for text formatting).  Perhaps you mean s/lowest/greatest/?

DES
-- 
Dag-Erling Smørgrav - des@des.no

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1721 — Re: Unison

On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 13:32:44 +0100
Dag-Erling Smørgrav <des@des.no> wrote:

> RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> writes:
> > Or rather, that "Rich Text" is as "low" as you should go.  OSX seems
> > to prefer RichText as a lowest common denominator, which for most
> > purposes, is probably correct and even helpful.
> 
> The lowest common denominator is always 1 (for numbers) or plain text
> (for text formatting).  Perhaps you mean s/lowest/greatest/?
> 
> DES
> -- 
> Dag-Erling Smørgrav - des@des.no


No, I mean that the developers of OSX choose RichText for *their* lowest common denominator, thinking "why would anyone ever want plain text?"  Whereas, for Usenet, plain text is the correct format.  That would explain why OSX would facilitate rich text format in things like copy-paste.  Unix on the other hands prefers plain text, as do I, in a nice, ugly, monospaced font :)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1733 — Re: Unison

In article <20140317133233.c15fa1ba.rsw@therandymon.com>, RS Wood
<rsw@therandymon.com> wrote:

> On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 13:32:44 +0100
> Dag-Erling Smørgrav <des@des.no> wrote:
> 
> > RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> writes:
> > > Or rather, that "Rich Text" is as "low" as you should go.  OSX seems
> > > to prefer RichText as a lowest common denominator, which for most
> > > purposes, is probably correct and even helpful.
> > 
> > The lowest common denominator is always 1 (for numbers) or plain text
> > (for text formatting).  Perhaps you mean s/lowest/greatest/?

> No, I mean that the developers of OSX choose RichText for *their* lowest
> common denominator, thinking "why would anyone ever want plain text?" 
> Whereas, for Usenet, plain text is the correct format.  That would explain
> why OSX would facilitate rich text format in things like copy-paste.  Unix on
> the other hands prefers plain text, as do I, in a nice, ugly, monospaced font :)

WTF are you talking about? It sounds to me like you're talking utter,
utter shite.

-- 
"If you're not able to ask questions and deal with the answers without feeling 
that someone has called your intelligence or competence into question, don't 
ask questions on Usenet where the answers won't be carefully tailored to avoid
tripping your hair-trigger insecurities."                  - D M Procida, UCSM

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1735 — Re: Unison

In message <170320141757350528%timstreater@greenbee.net> 
  Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
> In article <20140317133233.c15fa1ba.rsw@therandymon.com>, RS Wood
> <rsw@therandymon.com> wrote:

>> On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 13:32:44 +0100
>> Dag-Erling Smørgrav <des@des.no> wrote:
>> 
>> > RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> writes:
>> > > Or rather, that "Rich Text" is as "low" as you should go.  OSX seems
>> > > to prefer RichText as a lowest common denominator, which for most
>> > > purposes, is probably correct and even helpful.
>> > 
>> > The lowest common denominator is always 1 (for numbers) or plain text
>> > (for text formatting).  Perhaps you mean s/lowest/greatest/?

>> No, I mean that the developers of OSX choose RichText for *their* lowest
>> common denominator, thinking "why would anyone ever want plain text?" 
>> Whereas, for Usenet, plain text is the correct format.  That would explain
>> why OSX would facilitate rich text format in things like copy-paste.  Unix on
>> the other hands prefers plain text, as do I, in a nice, ugly, monospaced font :)

> WTF are you talking about? It sounds to me like you're talking utter,
> utter shite.

He certainly is talking out his ass.

-- 
He felt that the darkness was full of unimaginable horrors - and the
trouble with unimaginable horrors was that they were only too easy to
imagine...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1739 — Re: Unison

Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
> In article <20140317133233.c15fa1ba.rsw@therandymon.com>, RS Wood
> <rsw@therandymon.com> wrote:
> 
>> On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 13:32:44 +0100
>> Dag-Erling Smørgrav <des@des.no> wrote:
>>>> RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> writes:
>>>> Or rather, that "Rich Text" is as "low" as you should go.  OSX seems
>>>> to prefer RichText as a lowest common denominator, which for most
>>>> purposes, is probably correct and even helpful.
>>>>> The lowest common denominator is always 1 (for numbers) or plain text
>>> (for text formatting).  Perhaps you mean s/lowest/greatest/?
> 
>> No, I mean that the developers of OSX choose RichText for *their* lowest
>> common denominator, thinking "why would anyone ever want plain text?" >
>> Whereas, for Usenet, plain text is the correct format.  That would explain
>> why OSX would facilitate rich text format in things like copy-paste.  Unix on
>> the other hands prefers plain text, as do I, in a nice, ugly, monospaced font :)
> 
> WTF are you talking about? It sounds to me like you're talking utter,
> utter shite.


Actually he is on the right track.  When you copy formatted text in OS X
the OS will attempt to preserve the formatting.  If you paste the text into
an NSTextField (or whatever they are calling it now) which is capable of
holding formatted text, the OS will format the text so as to best match the
formatting of the source.

I know this sounds crazy, most OSs and windowing environments have such
primitive clipboards that it seems like magic, but this is old 80s tech
developed in Nextstep.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1742 — Re: Unison

In article
<1050494277416779016.923990bob_davis_retired-yahoo.com@news.eternal-sept
ember.org>, Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
> > In article <20140317133233.c15fa1ba.rsw@therandymon.com>, RS Wood
> > <rsw@therandymon.com> wrote:
> > 
> >> On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 13:32:44 +0100
> >> Dag-Erling Smørgrav <des@des.no> wrote:
> >>>> RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> writes:
> >>>> Or rather, that "Rich Text" is as "low" as you should go.  OSX seems
> >>>> to prefer RichText as a lowest common denominator, which for most
> >>>> purposes, is probably correct and even helpful.
> >>>>> The lowest common denominator is always 1 (for numbers) or plain text
> >>> (for text formatting).  Perhaps you mean s/lowest/greatest/?
> > 
> >> No, I mean that the developers of OSX choose RichText for *their* lowest
> >> common denominator, thinking "why would anyone ever want plain text?" >
> >> Whereas, for Usenet, plain text is the correct format.  That would explain
> >> why OSX would facilitate rich text format in things like copy-paste.  Unix
> >> on
> >> the other hands prefers plain text, as do I, in a nice, ugly, monospaced
> >> font :)
> > 
> > WTF are you talking about? It sounds to me like you're talking utter,
> > utter shite.
> 
> Actually he is on the right track.  When you copy formatted text in OS X
> the OS will attempt to preserve the formatting.  If you paste the text into
> an NSTextField (or whatever they are calling it now) which is capable of
> holding formatted text, the OS will format the text so as to best match the
> formatting of the source.

But if the recipient is expecting plain text then I would expect plain
text to land there on paste. Which IME is what happens. Yes, paste RTF
into a Word doc, but what would be the point of pasting it into e.g. a
TextWrangler window, or a Thoth window?

> I know this sounds crazy, most OSs and windowing environments have such
> primitive clipboards that it seems like magic, but this is old 80s tech
> developed in Nextstep.

Only perhaps to the extent that perhaps OS X has a better clipboard
than most.

-- 
"I am enclosing two tickets to the first night of my new play; bring a
friend.... if you have one." - GB Shaw to Churchill "Cannot possibly
attend first night, will attend second...  if there is one." - Winston
Churchill, in response.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1743 — Re: Unison

Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:

> But if the recipient is expecting plain text then I would expect plain
> text to land there on paste. Which IME is what happens. Yes, paste RTF
> into a Word doc, but what would be the point of pasting it into e.g. a
> TextWrangler window, or a Thoth window?

I think the issue is that Unison uses a text field that can accept
formatted text, and that there is no way to tell it to convert the entire
post to plain text, or only allow plain text by default.  Sadly I'm not
sure if the developer is active any more.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1744 — Re: Unison

In article
<762172327416784410.166667bob_davis_retired-yahoo.com@news.eternal-septe
mber.org>, Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
> 
> > But if the recipient is expecting plain text then I would expect plain
> > text to land there on paste. Which IME is what happens. Yes, paste RTF
> > into a Word doc, but what would be the point of pasting it into e.g. a
> > TextWrangler window, or a Thoth window?
> 
> I think the issue is that Unison uses a text field that can accept
> formatted text, and that there is no way to tell it to convert the entire
> post to plain text, or only allow plain text by default.  Sadly I'm not
> sure if the developer is active any more.

I see. Well, that's a Unison defect. But I sympathise - there are still
at least some Thoth bugs so I'm in the same boat.

-- 
"I am enclosing two tickets to the first night of my new play; bring a
friend.... if you have one." - GB Shaw to Churchill "Cannot possibly
attend first night, will attend second...  if there is one." - Winston
Churchill, in response.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.misc

csiph-web