Green Baron

That one made me lol :-) My 50 cents: View of progress is somewhat personal. In a subject where progress is fast people expect news every other day (like archaeology :-)), there sure are slower evolving fields of study. It is also somewhat depending on society and culture, in the rich northern hemisphere "progress" has become sort of a slogan, a view of the world used to transport messages to customers / consumers. Every new little subsubversion is a "progress" and those who don't participate do not "benefit" (sarcasm). In the poorer parts of the world or in those parts there is war since many years people might have a different opinion on "progress". Both views might be "warped" in a sense that they are based on different experiences and don't reflect the whole picture. I wouldn't say engineering hasn't kept pace with physics, the techniques of combining 10s of thousands of people into a project (project management) was developed, software engineering, the ability to develop complex systems out of simple modules are probably two outstanding examples for progress in engineering. There might be another "warp field" resulting from the fact that most of us have lived through peaceful times and are used to a world that through technical or organisational means partly thinks for us. We do so many things just automatically (fastend the seat belts, trust the food that we buy, believe in google, ...) that the underlying "progress" has become irrelevant to every day decisions. My grandparents had to experience ww2, they did not understand what happened around them in their last years. People flying to the moon, machines that do work automatically, i recall that my grandgrandmother sorted her clothes when sitting in front of the tv :-) A look back reveals that the development in human history has been graduate and slow without much "progress" for 2,5 million years until about 15.000 years ago, maybe a little acceleration in the last 50.000 years. Since +/-15.000 years progress went in waves, civilisations emerged, built up, conquered and vanished, often times very violently. Since then "Progress" hasn't been steady any more and maybe we shouldn't expect it to be a one-way-street over the span of many generations.

I find this a good idea. I played career and plan to do so when 1.2 is out and stable. Career gives a little "play reward". In the past, when career was completed, i did a few interplanetary missions and then i waited for the next release. Sandbox to me is for testing only. I find that role-play-element "levels" is pretty useless except for wheel repair and KAS. It can be deleted or moved to the astronaut faciltiy as tranining programs ... Or does anybody's playstyle rely on the levels ?

For those who don't know: DSS is DeepSkyStacker, a freeware program to stack frames onto each other, increasing "pointedness" of stars, filter out camera/chip- errors, etc. .... usually one makes a stack of exposed frames, in case of a monochrome camera with different filters for different wavelengths, these are "added" and then dark frames that may contain chip errors or "unevenness" of the setup are "subtracted". DSS helps with that. Hope that explanation wasn't too impertinent ... MaxPeck, you're a few steps ahead of me, i'm waiting for reasonable conditions :-) That filament in the "Witch's Broom" is really cool. Do you use any filters like infrared, skyglow, artificial light ?

A handaxe is a tool. It's clearly worked and retouched, though the uses of that thing are unclear, but the use does not matter (see below). Some handaxes could have been abandoned nuclei for tool production. Olduvan are tools, the owner was Homo habilis spp and later. Acheuleen is much younger and of course Homo erectus spp. (the assumed owner of the Acheuleen) did produce tools. I did not include later stonetool industries than Olduvan because i thought you were aware. I'm a miserable stoneknapper, but a handaxe i can do. And a little upper palaeolithic stuff, but a blade would be an accident :-). Indirect soft blow ... difficult. I once made my own arrowheads for the bow and points of the spear for the atl-atl (upper palaeolithic Propulseur, Speerschleuder, similar to the central american atl-atl.). These days i'm out of practice maybe ... :-) Yeah, some animals use tools. Few animals. Primates, macaques, crows .... I am aware that there are different levels of definition of "tool", so here's one derivation: Not everything lying on the ground was a tool, tool production and use is the outcome of a cognitive process. Therefore, a tool is not just picked up, a tool is a modified object. A screwdriver is a screwdriver. If turned around to bang in the screw it does not transform into a hammer, it is still a screwdriver. That is why the use does not define the purpose of a tool, the shape does. A tool is the outcome of a cognitive process, a modified object, that serves a purpose in manipulating something in the environment. On the other hand, if one accepts the notion that simple things become tools just because of their use one ends up with different definitions of tools for humans and animals, leading to the observation that many more animals use "tools" in a much wider sense. This is not a problem for noone if made clear, but these cases will probably not find their way into the journals .... In the above linked text about the caledonian crow this definition is reflected. So yes, kerbiloid, the example of the ape shaping the stick into a form is tool use. :-)

Well done, SQUAD ! I consider myself stingy with compliments, but from a short look into 1.2pre (career until mun-flyby) i have a good impression. The game seems to be stable (Linux), small improvements that i enjoyed in the short time: - Orbit lines and ui-fonts are more eyefriendly (for those of us who wear glasses for reading) - SAS isn't wobbling any more and sucking batteries empty during reentry - Craft really holds retrograde and not 5-10 degrees off I encountered a few very minor graphics glitches (z-fighting of lines in VAB, missing texture on airshield after stack separation) ... just cacahuetes :-)

Some people need a lot of pressure or a drastic experience to change their life. And some just stay their whole life long in a steady state without any change. Our society offers a basic supply, you don't even have get out to communicate, you can hang in front of the tv or pc the whole day long and get yourself fed up with that sort of "information". It is your decision. You have decided to declare yourself helpless and stubbornly resist every encouragement. This is what you want to do and i respect that. Over and out

Tried to recall that the past days. It was my first schoolyear, i remember faintly that we were listening to the show on the radio, but it must have been late in the evening.

When i was 19 i hung around with the punks in my hometown, we drank a lot, smoked a lot, listened to loud and fast music and didn't really care what others thought about us. That phase lasted a year or so, then i decided to do something useful with my time. See you later ;-) Edit i disarmed that before the admins get into trouble ...

I think the photos serve perfectly for the historic events :-)

Hi, while ESO build their E-ELT on the Cerro Paranal Armazones, the American TMT is still facing "legal and social complications" on Hawai'i. First light is planned for 2024 for both Telescopes. Now there seems to form a Plan B for the site of the TMT, the beautiful island of San Miguel de La Palma. That'll be right up the hill here. A technical commission is checking the conditions, the site, if chosen, wouldn't be far from the GTC. Well, there is not that much space up there ... http://elapuron.com/noticias/sociedad/95913/tmt-va-serio-la-palma-adapta-proyecto-al-observatorio-del-roque/ :-)

Hi, just for completion the definition of a tool, like seen by palaeoanthropology (and wikipedia too i see at a glance): A tool is defined by it's form. It must be worked to serve a (possibly unknown) use. A saw, hammer, nail, etc. Ad-hoc use of a stick/stone/gravity/body chemistry is not considered tool use, at least not for humans/hominids. Also chopped stone pre-products like flakes or blades are not considered tools but the base for making tools, like burins, scrapers, points, etc. These are the tools. A tool has a lifecycle and in some cases a proper analysis can reveal its use for certain application. e.g.: A stone, used ad hoc as a hammer, is not considered a tool because it cannot be identified as such. A stick, used by a raven to poke worms out of the bark, is in a strict sense not a tool. very basic tool: A stone, of suitable material and chopped to form a sharp edge and another one with marks that identifiy it as a chopstone, are tools -> Olduvan. I know that there are wider definitions out there, especially for birds and apes ... in a strict sense they are wrong and result from an erosion of definitions. Tool use in animals is rare, there are few examples http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v379/n6562/abs/379249a0.html http://bmcbiol.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12915-015-0204-7 :-)

As noone else dares to mention: Women, preferably screeching blondes. :-) (sorry dear ladies)

I loved to read Stanislaw Lem as a young guy. Partly humorous, partly critic short stories and novels, though never shallow (i found as a young guy). I remember reading his last book "Fiasco", that came out in the 80s, wihtout looking up. If the eyes fall shut over Dune these could be alternatives ... :-)

Ok, a definition we can work with. Not discussing the details, in principle i follow you, with one distinction: The cultural development that fulfills your definition is present in the Aurignacien, roughly 45.000y ago. Music (flutes and thundersticks), abstract art in figurines and wall paintings from todays Swabia and southern France tell that. Neandertal were maybe just in the course to develop something similar in the Chatelperronien, but that is not clear and highly doubted by many. Sorry what do you mean by AoA preexpansion ? Home-building (stone houses or houses from clay-tiles) is not that old, 12.000 years with goodwill (Cayönü, Göbekli Tepe, Jericho, Tell Aswad ...). There may have been new discoveries recently that i don't know of ... Same thoughts from my side. Edit: @Sigma88 came up with the idea that biological evolution could be universal principle (hope i remember that right). What do you think ?

Data scans for lifeforms: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WpC9Qiz8bvY Mars is the only realistic candidate for an active search for life and its metabolism products in the next decades, i dare say.

I remember, that for a palaeanthropological exhibition "Roots of Mankind", 2006 in Bonn, Germany, they built up a huge screen in the entryhall showing the movement of the brightest stars of the constellations over the last few hundred thousand years (i don't remember the exact number), to illustrate the timespan which the exhibition covered. Very impressive that was ! As i read the year ... that was of course the 150th of the Neandertal Neandertal :-)

Gemini is oozing the MysteryGoo(TM), no science points this time ... That guy seems to be rather eager to get out, did it smell inside ? :-)

Man, do take your time. I'd rather use pen, paper and a calculator until it's done.

Don't start with C#, start with Python. It costs nothing, is perfectly documented, really multiplatform without any dependencies, has libraries for many things (like graphics) and has a huge community. As i found out yesterday it's just peanuts to include C or C++ code in Python and vice versa. I'll help you installing and get running with Idle (development environment) and Python 3.4 if you have questions. But believe me, it's easy. First, get a can of beer orange juice from the fridge. Second watch a few introductory tutorials and then post your questions here if you have some. If not, just do what's explained in the tutorials. Start ! Now ! ... or i get the feeling you don't want to learn and then we all are wasting our time for you, we idiots. Edit: we will help but you must start ! https://www.python.org/ https://www.python.org/about/gettingstarted/

@ZooNamedGames, just start. If i may suggest, don't start with C++ or C#, the chances you will not bite yourself through might be bad. I cannot accompany you with online tutorials because i only have a satellite connection (20gb/month). Just choose a few tutorials and start. You need nothing. In the first tutorials they'll show you what you need. You don't need notepad (i wouldn't use it for python cause tab and indention, you'll see ;-)), development environments are available free, idle for example. A good tutorial will explain how to install and get running. Just start. Now. :-)

Python 3 is used by Blender and Godot. I linked them severel posts above. It's a start. Game development is a wide field, let's say a sophisticated simulator might have a speed problem with python, a platformer not. There are two kinds of languages: compiled and interpreted. Compiled ones need some planning before the coding begins, the programs are written in human readable and then compiled into machine language. Classic example: C. Interpreted languanges on the other side are written in plain text is then sent to an interpreter that translates and executes it. Classic example: Basic. Compiled programs are much faster. But a language like C, as easy and compact as it is, needs some deeper knowledge of the internals of a computer because you mess with memory directly. Which can really be punkrock but also great fun. Also, C is as fast as machine code. Wrtiting a game in plain c is - rewarding. I know a little C but have never written large programs (max. 2000 lines, long ago ... a few exercises lately). C++, i am in the course of learning it (for me alone) but i'm getting from one plateau to another. Would not recommend it to someone who hasn't been into programming before. Python is an interpreted language. It also has some object oriented stuff built in. You need not know about the machine's internals. How about it ? What kind if collaboration would you suggest ? Would you consider buying a book like e. g. https://www.amazon.com/Learning-Python-Fabrizio-Romano/dp/1783551712/ref=pd_sim_14_1?ie=UTF8&psc=1&refRID=68SQ2AYX8XMFQWPQAHXD to have a structured guide to follow ? I allways find internet tutorials too superficial and time consuming in relation to the output ;-)

Good idea. Which language ? Python e.g. ? Lot's of online courses, costs nothing, platform independent, widespread use ... Language doesn't matter, just concentrate on one. If you like i'll accompany you. That fat python 3 book lies here since 2 years ...

Bybye fermi :-/ Never heard of that guy, but that means nothing. What's "Kuhltuur" ? [provoke] To convince me gimmy more than reminiscences and youtube videos, i don't have the time and bandwidth to watch an hour discovery national geographic channel :-) [/provoke] I hope we can get away in less than a semester ;-) We're probably not that far away from each other. My post still stands: behaviour of animals grown up under human influence is different to that of the wild ones. See work on domestication and laboratory animals. Chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) in particular copy dominant individuals, that is naturally built in behaviour. So studying the behaviour of a chimpanzee in captivity or even the presence of a human gives different results than that of a wild one in it's habitat and group. That genius might partly be influenced by humans, and it shows. I would like to have this understood as "without human influence things would turn out different", and that's what this discussion is all about. Yes, things would as well turn out different without staphylococcus influence ... just different. Samesame, but different :-) Example for a (possible) difference chimpanzees/humans. Thesis: chimpanzees don't reflect what they are doing. Ok, most humans neither ... http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959438813000287

The prerelease looks pretty stable on linux after 1 hour. Minor graphics glitches and flaws (inline communotron doesn't communicate, new lateral one does) are to be expected. Next step: set up a proper comms network ... :-)

No objections, but if you want to understand the natural processes you must filter out the artificial influence. That's what makes the distinction important. Edit: and that is why people should not rely on youtube and wikipedia but get to the sources of research ;-) More edit: One day we might have to filter out potential data of artificial origin from a distant star. What to look for ?