Slashdot Mirror

. . .737-used runway. See the problem?

No, it's not. This happened on the east ramp. It connects to the other runway, but there's a fair bit of space there, and they'll be noticed.

Fairbanks is in a favorable position for flights going over the pole, so we see a number of planes larger than the 737. The runway was lengthened some years ago to accommodate these planes.

Perhaps says more about the culture of the language. If you go to the raw numbers, you'll see that WTF is not used in the more than 20k Ada repos. First -- surprised that there is that much overlap between Ada programmers and Github users; and second -- the kind of people that would use Ada generally would not type "WTF"...

Microsofts enterprise software is in a state of flux (SCCM 2012 is a nightmare IMHO)

How appropriate:

SCCM = Society of Critical Care Medicine

https://www.google.com/search?q=SCCM

The Fairbanks airport is also used by small private planes. The east ramp, where the incidents occurred, is where the small commercial operators, and the private planes are parked. In order to get over where the operators are, you have to cross a large open area. I doubt that this can happen undetected.

This airport has always served private pilots, as well as commercial operators. The incidents happened on the east ramp, where people need access to their private plans. In order to be a threat to the large commercial operations, you need to cross a large open area.

This is about where the incidents were happening. They weren't driving past 737s, but they were driving by many smaller aircraft. The east ramp isn't secured like the west ramp is. There are lots of private plans, and several small companies serving bush communities. Doesn't make the drivers any smarter, though.

Washington to chicago by road is 1100 km, that's 1100 km/300000 km/s = 3.6ms, so in a straight line it would be less than 3.6ms.

The speed of light in a cable, on a circuit board, etc is less than the speed of light in free space. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wave_propagation_speed for an introduction the the concept that the universe isn't governed by a single constant velocity.

Washington to chicago by road is 1100 km, that's 1100 km/300000 km/s = 3.6ms, so in a straight line it would be less than 3.6ms.

There are a couple of problems with your post.

I have been to some airports where a wrong turn leads you between two building an dthen into the runway. There isn't a way to realize this when you are in the car.

Can you name an airport that dumps you on the runway without a sign telling you that you're not supposed to be there? Regardless, that is not the case here. This is an international airport where apparently they had to drive for a mile down the taxiway first with signs indicating that they are in fact on the airport and that planes might share the road, followed by signs indicating that they should not be there at all. From TFA:

"They had to enter the airport property via a motion-activated gate, and afterwards there are many signs, lights and painted markings, first warning that aircraft may share the road and then that drivers should not be there at all.

"They needed to drive over a mile with all this before reaching the runway. But the drivers disregarded all that because they were following the directions given on their iPhones."

I don't know of a way to describe those drivers other than "stupid". Maybe "completely oblivious" or "willfully ignorant", but that's not too different from "stupid". They saw or should have seen signs indicating that they are not supposed to be there, and they kept going because their iPhone told them to. I'd like to get a look at that access control gate to figure out what they went through to get on the airport property in the first place, so that I can further judge the intelligence of people who drive through an airport access control gate thinking that they are approaching the terminal. I've never been to a major airport where I had to stop and wait for a gate to open in order to get to the terminal.

It looks like the gate in question is here. A big yellow sign that says "Aircraft Operations Area", and someone thinks "wow, this is exactly where I'm supposed to be." The Yield To Aircraft sign is a nice touch too. I always see those when I'm going to the passenger terminal. So there is someone out there driving their car, looking at that airport entrance, and mistaking it with this. Yeah, I'll go with "stupid".

There are a couple of problems with your post.

I have been to some airports where a wrong turn leads you between two building an dthen into the runway. There isn't a way to realize this when you are in the car.

Can you name an airport that dumps you on the runway without a sign telling you that you're not supposed to be there? Regardless, that is not the case here. This is an international airport where apparently they had to drive for a mile down the taxiway first with signs indicating that they are in fact on the airport and that planes might share the road, followed by signs indicating that they should not be there at all. From TFA:

"They had to enter the airport property via a motion-activated gate, and afterwards there are many signs, lights and painted markings, first warning that aircraft may share the road and then that drivers should not be there at all.

"They needed to drive over a mile with all this before reaching the runway. But the drivers disregarded all that because they were following the directions given on their iPhones."

I don't know of a way to describe those drivers other than "stupid". Maybe "completely oblivious" or "willfully ignorant", but that's not too different from "stupid". They saw or should have seen signs indicating that they are not supposed to be there, and they kept going because their iPhone told them to. I'd like to get a look at that access control gate to figure out what they went through to get on the airport property in the first place, so that I can further judge the intelligence of people who drive through an airport access control gate thinking that they are approaching the terminal. I've never been to a major airport where I had to stop and wait for a gate to open in order to get to the terminal.

It looks like the gate in question is here. A big yellow sign that says "Aircraft Operations Area", and someone thinks "wow, this is exactly where I'm supposed to be." The Yield To Aircraft sign is a nice touch too. I always see those when I'm going to the passenger terminal. So there is someone out there driving their car, looking at that airport entrance, and mistaking it with this. Yeah, I'll go with "stupid".

It's just as ridiculous as forcing people to pay car insurance or home insurance in some states.

I'm not familiar with any home insurance requirements here in Texas, but I have a mortgage, I'm sure the finance company requires it, just like they require auto insurance to finance a vehicle. But states don't (to my knowledge) require insurance that pays you for your own fault accidents, only to pay someone else for your fault accidents.

And while we're complaining about this, it's also just as ridiculous as forcing people to buy health insurance.

If I search for "cipher revelation" I get this in the url bar -
https://www.google.com/webhp?hl=en&tab=ww#hl=en&q=cipher+revelation

Does all of this travel in the clear or are the http request args seperated from the dns query and encrypted?

It's actually pretty important, due to a design problem with Chromium - the unified search and URL field.

Let's say you want to search. You type 'news for nerds' in the field, and Google auto-completes as it goes. Each keypress you send to Google gives you updated search results. OK, you were going to send it to Google anyway, so you kinda accept that.

Now, instead, you type: s-l-a-s-h-d--o-t-.-o-r-g and those are all sent to Google. Suddenly Google knows about all the *non-Google* websites you're visiting. And if it's not encrypted, NSA's PRISM scoops it up too. They don't have to tap your ISP, they've got it at Google's end. aka, "Dude, you've got Chrome!"

Encrypted is better, but only because the NSA is out of the equation (maybe), but Google isn't. If you're going to visit a website you don't want Google to know about, then you better not use Chrome, or find the knowledgebase article about how to disable it. To their credit, it's called out explicitly in their privacy policy, but in reality hardly anybody reads those (perhaps we need a privacy policy taxonomy).

Firefox's approach is better - there's a box where you can tell your search engine stuff, and there's a box where you can put in website addresses without anybody but your ISP and their ISP knowing about it. Well, unless the NSA has that tapped too.

http://www.google.com/#q=google+enables+more+https
redirects to
https://www.google.com/#q=google+enables+more+https

I like that maps and news are now also https.

So, to answer your question, no, it is not different, there is no extra security or privacy over doing it yourself.

It is just automatic.

http://www.google.com/#q=google+enables+more+https
redirects to
https://www.google.com/#q=google+enables+more+https

I like that maps and news are now also https.

So, to answer your question, no, it is not different, there is no extra security or privacy over doing it yourself.

It is just automatic.

http://www.google.com/#q=google+enables+more+https
redirects to
https://www.google.com/#q=google+enables+more+https

I like that maps and news are now also https.

So, to answer your question, no, it is not different, there is no extra security or privacy over doing it yourself.

It is just automatic.

http://www.google.com/#q=google+enables+more+https
redirects to
https://www.google.com/#q=google+enables+more+https

I like that maps and news are now also https.

So, to answer your question, no, it is not different, there is no extra security or privacy over doing it yourself.

It is just automatic.

Depending on Which Runway they used, this plane probably never crossed over civilian areas.

https://www.google.com/search?q=teenage+sexting+case

Near obsolete?
These are still very capable aircraft, with a wide variety of weapon systems.
They exceed the capabilities of all but two or three nations, and we have them in numbers, both on active duty and in reserve.

Don't right them off as obsolete yet.

Don't care about Excel, but OneNote is why I'd buy it

Also available for...android phone

A free Microsoft account is required to use OneNote for Android phones

Sigh! Yet another tracking app. I wish the open source community would make a OneNote replacement.

How is this different from just using HTTPS Everywhere or typing https://google.com/ into the URL bar?

You don't use something that isn't stable to run something as important and life critical as an IV pump. Nor would any hospital do so and any individual that tried would simply be a victim of natural selection.

From your mouth to God's Ears.

But just in case someone was thinking of doing this the FDA is going to step in and set guidelines.
Why: Because people are re-purposing cellphones for all sorts of stuff, most of it not well thought out.

You can find examples which contain unvetted information on the Google Play store. Some of this might find its way into actual use in the field, because in all too many cases doctors and computers live in two different worlds, and may come to trust something that looks approximately right, only to find out its horribly wrong in some places:

Examples (with no allegations of incorrectness or danger, simply to show examples that already exist):
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.shahlab.anesthesiologist
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=net.klier.blutdruck
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.qxmd.calculate
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.mobisystems.msdict.embedded.wireless.mcgrawhill.ivdh
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.sekos.dosagecalc

So yeah you might thing such doesn't exist, and these might be harmess infomation apps, but who's to know when nobody is watching.
And with NFC built into every phone these days, who's to say someone won't find another use for it?

You don't use something that isn't stable to run something as important and life critical as an IV pump. Nor would any hospital do so and any individual that tried would simply be a victim of natural selection.

From your mouth to God's Ears.

But just in case someone was thinking of doing this the FDA is going to step in and set guidelines.
Why: Because people are re-purposing cellphones for all sorts of stuff, most of it not well thought out.

You can find examples which contain unvetted information on the Google Play store. Some of this might find its way into actual use in the field, because in all too many cases doctors and computers live in two different worlds, and may come to trust something that looks approximately right, only to find out its horribly wrong in some places:

Examples (with no allegations of incorrectness or danger, simply to show examples that already exist):
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.shahlab.anesthesiologist
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=net.klier.blutdruck
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.qxmd.calculate
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.mobisystems.msdict.embedded.wireless.mcgrawhill.ivdh
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.sekos.dosagecalc

So yeah you might thing such doesn't exist, and these might be harmess infomation apps, but who's to know when nobody is watching.
And with NFC built into every phone these days, who's to say someone won't find another use for it?

You don't use something that isn't stable to run something as important and life critical as an IV pump. Nor would any hospital do so and any individual that tried would simply be a victim of natural selection.

From your mouth to God's Ears.

But just in case someone was thinking of doing this the FDA is going to step in and set guidelines.
Why: Because people are re-purposing cellphones for all sorts of stuff, most of it not well thought out.

You can find examples which contain unvetted information on the Google Play store. Some of this might find its way into actual use in the field, because in all too many cases doctors and computers live in two different worlds, and may come to trust something that looks approximately right, only to find out its horribly wrong in some places:

Examples (with no allegations of incorrectness or danger, simply to show examples that already exist):
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.shahlab.anesthesiologist
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=net.klier.blutdruck
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.qxmd.calculate
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.mobisystems.msdict.embedded.wireless.mcgrawhill.ivdh
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.sekos.dosagecalc

So yeah you might thing such doesn't exist, and these might be harmess infomation apps, but who's to know when nobody is watching.
And with NFC built into every phone these days, who's to say someone won't find another use for it?

You don't use something that isn't stable to run something as important and life critical as an IV pump. Nor would any hospital do so and any individual that tried would simply be a victim of natural selection.

From your mouth to God's Ears.

But just in case someone was thinking of doing this the FDA is going to step in and set guidelines.
Why: Because people are re-purposing cellphones for all sorts of stuff, most of it not well thought out.

You can find examples which contain unvetted information on the Google Play store. Some of this might find its way into actual use in the field, because in all too many cases doctors and computers live in two different worlds, and may come to trust something that looks approximately right, only to find out its horribly wrong in some places:

Examples (with no allegations of incorrectness or danger, simply to show examples that already exist):
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.shahlab.anesthesiologist
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=net.klier.blutdruck
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.qxmd.calculate
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.mobisystems.msdict.embedded.wireless.mcgrawhill.ivdh
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.sekos.dosagecalc

So yeah you might thing such doesn't exist, and these might be harmess infomation apps, but who's to know when nobody is watching.
And with NFC built into every phone these days, who's to say someone won't find another use for it?

You don't use something that isn't stable to run something as important and life critical as an IV pump. Nor would any hospital do so and any individual that tried would simply be a victim of natural selection.

From your mouth to God's Ears.

But just in case someone was thinking of doing this the FDA is going to step in and set guidelines.
Why: Because people are re-purposing cellphones for all sorts of stuff, most of it not well thought out.

You can find examples which contain unvetted information on the Google Play store. Some of this might find its way into actual use in the field, because in all too many cases doctors and computers live in two different worlds, and may come to trust something that looks approximately right, only to find out its horribly wrong in some places:

Examples (with no allegations of incorrectness or danger, simply to show examples that already exist):
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.shahlab.anesthesiologist
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=net.klier.blutdruck
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.qxmd.calculate
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.mobisystems.msdict.embedded.wireless.mcgrawhill.ivdh
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.sekos.dosagecalc

So yeah you might thing such doesn't exist, and these might be harmess infomation apps, but who's to know when nobody is watching.
And with NFC built into every phone these days, who's to say someone won't find another use for it?

Don't care about Excel, but OneNote is why I'd buy it

Also available for ipad

and

android phone

[SARCASM] Yes because you JUST KNOW that they WILL put the phone down when the light turns green right? [SARCASM] Yeah sure. I can immediately tell when someone is texting if I'm driving behind them. When you have just sheer carnage from bicyclists getting rear-ended by texting drivers (including one just recently by my sister-in-law), this so-called victimless crime of texting while driving is utter bullshit.

The first part of your question is easy enough to calculate: a=omega^2*r => omega=sqrt(a/r)

So for earth-normal gravity (although it's likely that Mars- or moon-gravity would suffice), 100m radius ring (or dumbbell), you'd rotate at 0.313 radians per second or about 1 revolution every 20 seconds. Can the human body handle that without puking? No idea.

You shouldn't really trust the domain either. It might lead you into thinking this is safe. NSFW.

Declared dead 63 times since April 1995

It's funny because the early quotes don't sound that much different than the recent ones:

1995

Unless somebody pulls a rabbit out of a hat, companies tend to have long glide slopes because of the installed bases. But Apple is just gliding down this slope and they're loosing market share every year. Things start to spiral down once you get under a certain threshold. And when developers no longer write applications for your computer, that's when it really starts to fall apart.

1996

These facts were summed up by Stan Dolberg of Forrester Research who said, "whether they stand alone or are acquired, Apple as we know it, is cooked." [Article found through David Pogue's column "The Desktop Critic: Reality Check 2000" in Macworld Magazine, where the quote still resides.]

One day Apple was a major technology company with assets to make any self-respecting techno-conglomerate salivate. The next day Apple was a chaotic mess without a strategic vision and certainly no future.

1997

I'm a Mac lover, but last year I switched over completely to Windoze because Apple couldn't build a reasonable laptop. I really want it to succeed, but I think the company's finished. Software vendors aren't turning out enough code to keep the Mac as a really good platform, even for family and school stuff. This whole NeXT decision seems to be a waste of time. It should have been sold to HP for $35 per share a year and a half ago.

2000

Steve Jobs can't run companies, but he has proven that he is a genius at motivating teams of people to produce extraordinary products. In fact, he may be the greatest project team leader in the history of high tech. That is no small achievement. But it does not translate to being the CEO of a giant corporation. Jobs failed the first time running Apple, failed at Next and only succeeded at Pixar because the company worked around him. He succeeded in the short term during this, his second, Apple tenure because he ran the whole company as a product team. That only works so long. Why is he a poor CEO? Because he's mercurial, insufficiently engaged by the more boring (but crucial) operations like distribution and, ultimately, because he's a pretty nasty piece of work. In the best of all scenarios, Jobs would hire a competent CEO and focus on product development, but his ego would soon lead him to undermine his replacement. Steve Jobs is Apple's Alcibiades: the company can't live without him, or with him.

Investors may be asking themselves what Apple can do to revive its fortunes. The likely answer, unfortunately, is that Steve Jobs has no white rabbits left in his hat. Apple appears to be facing a dead end in its business growth, the victim of mismanagement and unmitigated hubris. Apple lovers are a loyal bunch, and they'll probably stick with the company. But Jobs's dream of becoming the world's biggest computer-maker will likely remain just that -- a dream.

2080 plus or minus 20 years, according to most climatologists.

2040 plus or minus 10 years, according to climatologists specialising in the Arctic.

2028 plus or minus 7-ish years (for under 1 million square kilometers of ice area at minimum), according to the trend.

It's pretty early to be calling it, but the technically extremely simple home button apparently stops functioning properly more than seldom. Googling 'broken home button' provides some evidence for that.

Just the fact alone that dirt could enter through the home button should raise the concern that the fingerprint scanner could be affected.

Apple 0.5 meter Lightning - USB-A cable for iPhone 5: http://store.apple.com/us/product/ME291ZM/A/lightning-to-usb-cable $19
Apple 2.0 meter Lightning - USB-A cable for iPhone 5: http://store.apple.com/us/product/MD819ZM/A/lightning-to-usb-cable-2-m $29

Google (LG) 1.2 meter USB-Micro to USB-A cable for Nexus 4: https://play.google.com/store/devices/details/Nexus_4_Micro_USB_Cable?id=nexus_4_usb_cable $9.99

Note that if your Nexus 4 cable breaks you can go and get a standard USB-Micro to USB-A cable at walgreens, most grocery stores, the home depot, most anywhere -- your mom probably has one in her junk drawer. The apple stuff is harder to find, and more expensive.

Also consider the cost to replace the power brick for a macbook pro, with that stupid mag-safe connector. Another proprietary nightmare at $79.

If I want a power brick for a ThinkPad, Amazon's got 'em for $39. And the ThinkPad power brick uses an industry-standard IEC C5 power connector on the input side, if I want to travel abroad with my ThinkPad, all I need to get is a local power cord.

Oh yeah, I can replace the battery in my ThinkPads myself in seconds. The Macbook Pro? Maybe in an hour, if I don't loose any of the screws.

It's a bit of a non-story in my opinion, as I think most people worry about Ubuntu and their direct partners slurping all their search info, whereas this "news" is that they now insert an anonymiser into image URLs so that random web site Z doesn't pick up your IP address when your computer tries to render an image.

Well, if that's what it is, I'd say it's actually a good thing, because people with their brains on are already concerned about "Ubuntu [or rather, Canonical] and their direct partners slurping all their search info", because that's obviously possible; people get to make a semi-informed decision on that. But people who've made the decision to trust Ubuntu, including trusting them to vet their partners on the user's behalf (hah!), might not realize that any images in the results, even results they don't click on, are sending their IP address to the server hosting the image, so blocking that information leak (with an image proxy provided by the people who you're already implicitly trusting) is preventing people from unknowing privacy exposure, and that's always a good thing.

It's a bit of a non-story in my opinion, as I think most people worry about Ubuntu and their direct partners slurping all their search info, whereas this "news" is that they now insert an anonymiser into image URLs so that random web site Z doesn't pick up your IP address when your computer tries to render an image.

There are no "dynamic languages" and "static languages". C can be interpreted and Python, Java and Perl can be compiled directly to an executable (i.e. no bytecode / no VM). There are statically typed languages and dynamically typed languages as well a run time (late) bound and compile time (early) bound languages. There are no static and dynamic languages. Therefore it is impossible to show you what you ask for. Your question is based on a complete lack of understanding of programming languages. HANL.

I've posted them up on my G+ account, so I'll just link to that instead of repeating myself here. Just remember, though, I come from a 3G to a 4 to a 5.

https://plus.google.com/110699958808389605834/posts/STPAexQXV6H

BTW if you are on Android its called "Super backup" and its free..

It [https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.idea.backup.smscontacts&hl=en/] is not free, it is "free" as in ad-supported and their screenshots do not show the ads; the "Pro" version is $1.99. Get it strait, ad-supported is not free, just paid in an alternate manner.

The IEEE and Los Alamos National Laboratory seem to have a different opinion on this. And even the Oxford dictionary knows the use of codes. But surely those guys can't even spell gigahertz.

It is not hacking if you granted them permission to do it.

Damn, I forgot about that one. You might be right.

Olds Vista Cruiser

Chevy Nomad

Damn, I forgot about that one. You might be right.

Olds Vista Cruiser

Chevy Nomad

It would be pretty darned hypocritical of us to indiscriminately bomb people and then say that you shouldn't use A.I.

Now that it's becoming well-known that drone operators get severe PTSD (an injury to the moral reasoning part of the brain), the USG is going to need some H-K drones to carry on their murderous adventures.

A.I.'s don't balk at attacking civilians either - they'll never be told that their maintenance budgets are funded by their targets' paycheck withholdings.

The simulation you posted is very interesting, reminds me of Polyworld I believe this is the google tech talk. though I can't check atm.

I've been looking at some simple learning machines in my spare time, any chance you could post the code to github or similar?

Out of curiosity why did you go with javascript? I considered making some similar webapp for this (AI and genetic algorithms) and was leaning towards an embedded java applet as I assume the speed difference is substantial and thought scala/clojure might bring benefits.

You can legally drive within 1000ft of the Davis-Besse cooling tower. The ungated service road that runs right by it is even closer but I suspect that there are sensors to detect intrusions or at least I hope there are.

You can legally drive within 1000ft of the Davis-Besse cooling tower. The ungated service road that runs right by it is even closer but I suspect that there are sensors to detect intrusions or at least I hope there are.

the rest of the plant is just a massive structure, much of it radioactive enough to reduce the otherwise significant scrap value and require special procedures, built durable enough that it'll be expensive to demolish) which increases the odds that Maine Yankee HQ will do their best to classify the site as some sort of minimally-operational status in perpetuity, because hiring a couple of guards to wander around and punch the clock is cheaper than fully pulling out, leaving the town with a big derelict structure.

Nice rant, but you're way off base. A little research goes a long way... according to the Wikipedia entry on the plant, it was dismantled and cleanup was completed eight years ago. If you visit the site on Google Maps you can see that all that remains are the fuel casks and a transformer station.
 

They are hardly alone in that, though. All kinds of industrial processes (especially anything inherited from the good old days when Men Were Men, Cigarettes were a health food, and PCBs were a Miracle of Science), even if their buildings are cheaper to tear down, leave the underlying site in lousy enough shape that it's usually cheaper just to say 'eh, fuck 'em' and choose a greenfield location somewhere else.

Again, you're way off base - brownfield sites are routinely remediated and redeveloped.

There were other reasons to close it.