Niven and Pournelle wrote one of the best depictions of space combat in "hard" SF in their novel The Gripping Hand. Aside from the ships' shields, most of the rest of the technology obeys known physics, and therefore you have to wait minutes or even hours for your laser shot to arrive at its target (assuming the target hasn't changed course that is) and then an equal amount of time to detect whether your shot hit or missed.
Other notable accounts can be found in Peter F. Hamilton's Night's Dawn trilogy (e.g., Lady MacBeth's missile combat above the planet Lalonde), and the final combat scene in David Brin's Startide Rising. Both of those are space opera rather than hard SF, but the combat scenes do try to minimize the necessary suspension of disbelief.
All in all, real world space combat is going to be a lot more like submarine warfare than is generally depicted in popular SF TV and movies. Anything analogous to an atmospheric fighter plane will very likely be a robot or waldo rather than a one-seat piloted vessel.
(Got interrupted so posting this a long time after hitting "Reply"... sorry for any redundancies.)
Overall the Atlantic is rather good journalism, with well-written science articles for the layperson and many good progressive viewpoints well expressed in their pages, but they do seem to suffer from the need for "objective balance" -- McArdle is one of their biggest counterweights on the right, and it shows in every column she writes. And they give space to no one with an alternative viewpoint in that department, which they call Economics. There's been a growing movement in the progressive blogs to petition the Atlantic to let her go, but it has fallen on deaf ears.
I elected not to renew my subscription to them when it came up in the stack of bills this month. It was a tough decision; I like the magazine. But McArdle's continual drumbeating for kleptocracy made up my mind. That was just a week ago. Now, I don't regret it. For the same amount, I can subscribe to Rolling Stone and get Matt Taibbi's articles, which are much more original and definitely not corporate-sponsored.
No, he's right. Slashdot's moderation system is indeed open to abuse by like-minded people intolerant of particular opinions, if there are enough of them.
Many times I've been attacked, repeatedly, in comments for just mentioning I own a Macbook Pro and accused of bragging about owning one. (In fact, the thing is six years old and has needed replacement since before SCII came out). If I say anything positive about it or my preference for Apple, I get modded down to -1 faster than I can say "William Henry Gates III."
The summary reads like a Fox News attack: Facts arise that don't reflect talking point; react by moving goalposts ("what is the acceptable norm?" implying that even, way, way above norm is not acceptable), and by misrepresentation ("Apple's plant"). Then claim "we're just reporting; you get to decide."
People who use these BS tactics for turning bullshit into news and casting facts into doubt should automatically raise suspicions. It's a clear sign that they have drawn a conclusion and are attempting to tailor the facts to support it.
And to think, Apple (under Jobs' first stint as CEO) taunted record companies with just one note.
And for people who just don't get it... Grammys are awarded for contributions to the business of music as well as the art. Love it or hate it, iTunes was instrumental (lol) in forcing the record companies to adopt the digital downloads business model.
The business models of creative authors, composers and performers had to change every time each of the following was invented:
- Writing - Musical Notation - Printing Press - Photographs - Moving Pictures - AM Radio - FM Radio - Cassette Tapes - VCRs - CDs - CD-R/DVD-R - Tivo/DVR/PVRs - Broadband Internet
Each time the nature of the change was different and unpredictable. But clever people found ways to make money, much to the kicking and screaming and wrath of the people who had made money using the old business model. We don't say now that it's evil to record a song from the radio, or time shift using VHS, or purchase a book or sheet music. At one time or another, all of these things were reviled as "stealing" or "piracy." Now they're accepted norms.
Why should the last invention on the list be any different? I can assure you, eventually it won't be.
Aside from MU, Filesonic is the only other host that has disabled downloading altogether, however Uploaded.to has blocked North American access [according to Wikipedia].
Other hosts have either hurriedly obfuscated their links and filenames (not always the same) to foil MAFIAA robo-searches, or are responding to takedown notices so fast that the links on the referring forums and blogs grow stale within a day or two. The former appears to be much more common than the latter, although a few sites (like Hotfile) started responding quickly to takedown notices last winter, long before the MU takedown).
TFA's conclusion seems pretty accurate, though it's slim on supporting details. The MU takedown has created only minor inconveniences for those who want free content.
As another EE with experience in rad hard space qualified design, he's not being self-contradictory. He's spot on.
If your CMOS structures are prone to latchup in the presence of single high energy events, then shielding does you no good. The amount of shielding necessary would more than consume the entire payload mass budget. Adding insufficient shielding just creates showers of secondary particles, each with more than enough energy to cause latchup alone, therefore rendering you at a statistical loss compared to no shielding whatsoever.
With this in mind means designing the CMOS structure to make shielding unnecessary. For example, build your circuits on bulk insulators instead of bulk semiconductor.
Just because you can't understand it doesn't mean he's self contradictory. You just missed his point. And then attacked him.
Since it's a treaty, like NAFTA, it's far easier to implement, far harder to challenge in court, and more powerful than an act of Congress. And it's global.
The SOPA bill was derailed because it required both houses of the U.S. Congress to pass it, and for President Barack Obama to sign it. Once approved, it would have been subject to challenge and could have been changed by future congresses.
ACTA, on the other hand, was already signed by the United States on Oct. 11, 2011, and Obama was not required to get the approval of any outside authority to do so: not the Congress, not the Supreme Court, and not the American public.
Now that it has been signed, the legislative and judicial branches of the U.S. government also have little ability to challenge or amend the treaty, and Americans would be subject to a whole new scheme of laws, restrictions and regulations that could have them facing fines or jail through a process that would likely exist entirely outside the scope of the American justice system.
Who can sleep in a car seat? Not me, I haven't been able to since I was 3.
Now, the only thing that will motivate me to give up control of my car is if I can darken the windows and have a wank on the way to / from work. I have a 30 minute commute... just about perfect.
In the meantime, I'm going to [try to] enjoy the experience of driving while I still can.
While very nerdy, yes, your arrangement still leaves you liable to charges of destroying evidence. You took active steps, in advance, to destroy evidence that you knew the authorities would be looking for. The fact that the trigger was the action of the police is not sufficient to evade these charges, it only proves that you were aware of what you were doing, thus making it easy for prosecutors to prove intent.
No, the Skittle plan has the essential benefit of making you appear only to be eccentric, or even mentally insane, but not necessarily setting a trap for the police.
Using it will scramble the disk beyond ANY recoverability.
And then you've committed the crime of tampering with evidence / destroying evidence. Good luck evading conviction for that.
No, your only hope is to set up a random password whose mnemonic is something the *police* will destroy when they search your premises, as in "Your honor, my password was recorded by the order in which I kept Skittles on my desk but the act of collecting these Skittles destroyed my record of my password. It is irretrievably lost due to the actions of the police. I would help if I were able but my memory is wholly inadequate, and the only record was destroyed by the police."
Slashdot Mirror
Niven and Pournelle wrote one of the best depictions of space combat in "hard" SF in their novel The Gripping Hand. Aside from the ships' shields, most of the rest of the technology obeys known physics, and therefore you have to wait minutes or even hours for your laser shot to arrive at its target (assuming the target hasn't changed course that is) and then an equal amount of time to detect whether your shot hit or missed.
Other notable accounts can be found in Peter F. Hamilton's Night's Dawn trilogy (e.g., Lady MacBeth's missile combat above the planet Lalonde), and the final combat scene in David Brin's Startide Rising. Both of those are space opera rather than hard SF, but the combat scenes do try to minimize the necessary suspension of disbelief.
Also worth mentioning is many scenes in Alastair Reynolds' Revelation Space series of novels.
All in all, real world space combat is going to be a lot more like submarine warfare than is generally depicted in popular SF TV and movies. Anything analogous to an atmospheric fighter plane will very likely be a robot or waldo rather than a one-seat piloted vessel.
(Got interrupted so posting this a long time after hitting "Reply"... sorry for any redundancies.)
Umm... dude, that's not her neck.
You really should get out more.
Overall the Atlantic is rather good journalism, with well-written science articles for the layperson and many good progressive viewpoints well expressed in their pages, but they do seem to suffer from the need for "objective balance" -- McArdle is one of their biggest counterweights on the right, and it shows in every column she writes. And they give space to no one with an alternative viewpoint in that department, which they call Economics. There's been a growing movement in the progressive blogs to petition the Atlantic to let her go, but it has fallen on deaf ears.
I elected not to renew my subscription to them when it came up in the stack of bills this month. It was a tough decision; I like the magazine. But McArdle's continual drumbeating for kleptocracy made up my mind. That was just a week ago. Now, I don't regret it. For the same amount, I can subscribe to Rolling Stone and get Matt Taibbi's articles, which are much more original and definitely not corporate-sponsored.
No, he's right. Slashdot's moderation system is indeed open to abuse by like-minded people intolerant of particular opinions, if there are enough of them.
Many times I've been attacked, repeatedly, in comments for just mentioning I own a Macbook Pro and accused of bragging about owning one. (In fact, the thing is six years old and has needed replacement since before SCII came out). If I say anything positive about it or my preference for Apple, I get modded down to -1 faster than I can say "William Henry Gates III."
The summary reads like a Fox News attack: Facts arise that don't reflect talking point; react by moving goalposts ("what is the acceptable norm?" implying that even, way, way above norm is not acceptable), and by misrepresentation ("Apple's plant"). Then claim "we're just reporting; you get to decide."
People who use these BS tactics for turning bullshit into news and casting facts into doubt should automatically raise suspicions. It's a clear sign that they have drawn a conclusion and are attempting to tailor the facts to support it.
Yes, but what I heard about PRAM is that you have to push it. A lot.
Filesharing sites didn't prove one could make money with digital distribution, so sadly, no.
Whether the RIAA will eventually recognize that they proved that free distribution can increase paid distribution remains to be seen.
And to think, Apple (under Jobs' first stint as CEO) taunted record companies with just one note.
And for people who just don't get it... Grammys are awarded for contributions to the business of music as well as the art. Love it or hate it, iTunes was instrumental (lol) in forcing the record companies to adopt the digital downloads business model.
It's like being able to spit 100 yards, what good would that be?
Well, it depends on the accuracy at 100 yards.
If you could hit someone's eye at 100 yards, I daresay there would be more than a few practical applications.
The business models of creative authors, composers and performers had to change every time each of the following was invented:
- Writing
- Musical Notation
- Printing Press
- Photographs
- Moving Pictures
- AM Radio
- FM Radio
- Cassette Tapes
- VCRs
- CDs
- CD-R/DVD-R
- Tivo/DVR/PVRs
- Broadband Internet
Each time the nature of the change was different and unpredictable. But clever people found ways to make money, much to the kicking and screaming and wrath of the people who had made money using the old business model. We don't say now that it's evil to record a song from the radio, or time shift using VHS, or purchase a book or sheet music. At one time or another, all of these things were reviled as "stealing" or "piracy." Now they're accepted norms.
Why should the last invention on the list be any different? I can assure you, eventually it won't be.
Aside from MU, Filesonic is the only other host that has disabled downloading altogether, however Uploaded.to has blocked North American access [according to Wikipedia].
Other hosts have either hurriedly obfuscated their links and filenames (not always the same) to foil MAFIAA robo-searches, or are responding to takedown notices so fast that the links on the referring forums and blogs grow stale within a day or two. The former appears to be much more common than the latter, although a few sites (like Hotfile) started responding quickly to takedown notices last winter, long before the MU takedown).
TFA's conclusion seems pretty accurate, though it's slim on supporting details. The MU takedown has created only minor inconveniences for those who want free content.
As another EE with experience in rad hard space qualified design, he's not being self-contradictory. He's spot on.
If your CMOS structures are prone to latchup in the presence of single high energy events, then shielding does you no good. The amount of shielding necessary would more than consume the entire payload mass budget. Adding insufficient shielding just creates showers of secondary particles, each with more than enough energy to cause latchup alone, therefore rendering you at a statistical loss compared to no shielding whatsoever.
With this in mind means designing the CMOS structure to make shielding unnecessary. For example, build your circuits on bulk insulators instead of bulk semiconductor.
Just because you can't understand it doesn't mean he's self contradictory. You just missed his point. And then attacked him.
When you're elderly, there's a lot of loose things worse than a loose wheelchair.
It *is* a lawn...
How does it taste?
Well, if nothing's eaten it in 200ky, then it must taste pretty crappy.
We know; it's distracting. Please stop projecting.
At the very least, lay off the BBW pr0n while we're eating.
Wikileaks' servers were destroyed.
Hmm, I wonder what the HTTP Response Code for 'servers destroyed' is?
Gee. They tried that first. The hosting company was called Amazon.
Look how well that worked out.
Let's call it the Mountainous Occluded Fortification Ordinance.
I think I'll wait until 3D printers can 3D print other 3D printers.
Thank you for the illumination.
And thank you for demonstrating that Slashdot comments haven't completely deteriorated to 4chan levels of discourse...
Since it's a treaty, like NAFTA, it's far easier to implement, far harder to challenge in court, and more powerful than an act of Congress. And it's global.
ACTA vs. SOPA: Five Reasons ACTA is Scarier Threat to Internet Freedom from the International Business Times:
The SOPA bill was derailed because it required both houses of the U.S. Congress to pass it, and for President Barack Obama to sign it. Once approved, it would have been subject to challenge and could have been changed by future congresses.
ACTA, on the other hand, was already signed by the United States on Oct. 11, 2011, and Obama was not required to get the approval of any outside authority to do so: not the Congress, not the Supreme Court, and not the American public.
Now that it has been signed, the legislative and judicial branches of the U.S. government also have little ability to challenge or amend the treaty, and Americans would be subject to a whole new scheme of laws, restrictions and regulations that could have them facing fines or jail through a process that would likely exist entirely outside the scope of the American justice system.
Who can sleep in a car seat? Not me, I haven't been able to since I was 3.
Now, the only thing that will motivate me to give up control of my car is if I can darken the windows and have a wank on the way to / from work. I have a 30 minute commute... just about perfect.
In the meantime, I'm going to [try to] enjoy the experience of driving while I still can.
Alas, I had the word 'papers' in place of Skittles, but replaced it with a more jocular noun.
Besides, I'd probably absent-mindedly eat a Skittle one day, and then boy would I be experiencing the rainbow...
While very nerdy, yes, your arrangement still leaves you liable to charges of destroying evidence. You took active steps, in advance, to destroy evidence that you knew the authorities would be looking for. The fact that the trigger was the action of the police is not sufficient to evade these charges, it only proves that you were aware of what you were doing, thus making it easy for prosecutors to prove intent.
No, the Skittle plan has the essential benefit of making you appear only to be eccentric, or even mentally insane, but not necessarily setting a trap for the police.
Using it will scramble the disk beyond ANY recoverability.
And then you've committed the crime of tampering with evidence / destroying evidence. Good luck evading conviction for that.
No, your only hope is to set up a random password whose mnemonic is something the *police* will destroy when they search your premises, as in "Your honor, my password was recorded by the order in which I kept Skittles on my desk but the act of collecting these Skittles destroyed my record of my password. It is irretrievably lost due to the actions of the police. I would help if I were able but my memory is wholly inadequate, and the only record was destroyed by the police."