4-inch steel panels would sttop most bullets - but where would they transfer the momentum ? If your tank is standing / moving on the ground, your 4-inch steel panels just need to spread the impact of the bullets, and transfer momentum to the body of the tank. Body is standing on the ground with a lot of frictional force in most horizontal directions. For the vertical component of the impact of the bullet - compressive and tensile strength of the tank is enormous - supported by the hardness of the ground in the one direction, and gravity with hundred ton-weight force in the other direction.
When an object is trying to leave the earth / travelling around the earth all of these advantages vanish, or get drastically reduced. It gets billions of times lower friction from the atmosphere. Nothing extra to protect it in the vertical direction. It would surely keep getting misdirected significantly.
100 ton tank would barely get misdirected by pico-radians with a 30 g bullet at 1200 km / h. 100 ton satellite, while being much rarer than 100 ton tank and much more expensive to launch than usual size of satellites - would get misdirected by multiple tens of milli-radians with 30 g debris at 1200 km / h.
So, engineers would come up with a constantly steering design. Which might be more expensive than a design that fights the space debris back - detect using radar / optical / heat sensing : and shoot incoming debris using laser.
Naysayers will almost never win against engineers in the long term - but this is just an enormous cost increase for any space faring for no good reason.
On Amazon, it is useful to give real name as it helps in delivery and warranty / RMA. Amazon does not make it easy to give another name to publish your reviews under. There is not much reason for Amazon to make it easy, either. For not publicizing to the world what you bought, reviews need to come as AC on Amazon, or using another Amazon account.
There is a fundamental disconnect between one purchase one review, and privacy. Amazon might see it as increasing the number of reviews by even allowing privacy minded buyers to review in another name.
You yourself confused her. Telling someone "if you don't like the interface", raises the possibility of not liking it. Without having an alternative in mind, it was an extremely stupid thing to say.
The " standard " in this case is the default desktop that comes with the distro. Non technical users don't have specific requirements, so the default should work if there are no major bugs. If there are bugs that bother them, use an alternative. Chose any, more popular and mainstream ones more likely to succeed.
Not only is presumption of innocence not absolute - it survived and thrived only because law enforcement used to be difficult and expensive. It was a necessity , touted as deep philosophy
In 2017 around 4 billion people on this planet flew in a plane
Liar. In last 100 years combined, 4 billion people have not flown in a plane. Some people, mostly among the richest 1 billion, keep flying multiple times, some about a hundred times per year.
1. There are 2 "pilot"s - one can easily look into the manual when the other pulls up the nose repeatedly. 2. Cars , at typical highway speeds, are surrounded by things into which it can crash in milliseconds. Aircraft after taking off - not so much. 3. "Pilot"s, both of them, are trained to look into specific sections of the manual when the need arises. Car drivers, not so much. Partly because of reasons 1 and 2 above. 4. If all else fails to convince you - you are just arguing against established, SOP. Which could have been established partly for reasons 1, 2 and 3 above.
No, that is only true for a very limited definition of "our". Very likely to miss at least one of you, the poster of the GP post, or me. The ancestors common to almost every human alive today had died about 100,000 years ago.
How can "critics" be more accurate , when the word, in plural and non-specific like you have put it, is extremely inaccurate ?
By definition, it includes the ACs on/. , the trolls on YouTube comment section, the "short sellers" that regularly frequent Musk's nightmares, and also somewhat technically qualified people. The latter, in my experience, have largely restricted themselves to mentioning the unlikelihood or unprecedentedness of some of Tesla's achievements. Or contradicted timelines of Tesla's profitability : which did slip a few times. Also, given the fundamental inaccuracy of tweets due to brevity: it is hard to know what kind of profitability Musk is claiming to attain by what time. This makes the critics criticise one interpretation of the tweet, and the fanboys extol another.
Some of the technically qualified commenters have been supportive of Tesla, but that makes them "non-critics", by definition.
A trailer containing a gasoline tanker and electricity generator can be designed in weeks. Next version of electric cars can contain a better inbuilt way of attaching such a trailer : though I think most of today's electric cars can attach a trailer, or can be modified in less than a few weeks to be able to attach a trailer.
Next, only the places which don't have super chargers need to have the gas pumps. It's a bit taxing on the economy of scale of the gas pumps : and gas prices might rise a bit, but may not be exorbitant.
Of course, Musk most likely hasn't thought of reachability, national security, or practically anything other than next week's stock price.
You misunderstood. The study didn't say that 40+ pushups are positively correlated with being an "actual athlete". It says 40+ pushups are negatively correlated with heart disease.
BTW, being an actual athlete and heart disease are in turn negatively correlated - but it is not a perfect negative correlation. So the above 2 statements between which you conflated are not in effect identical.
Is an unsupported statement until further evidence.
You could have said " A cure may be less profitable than a treatment,". But the other unsupported assumption in the same post is evidence for your inability to understand logic:
it's so much less profitable that the profits from their pre-existing treatments resulted in enough money to buy out the company with a cure in full.
Millions of reasons, and thousands of products could have resulted in the "enough money".
You still need to prove this in the general case, though most people can think of specific examples where this is true.
In fact, it's so much less profitable that the profits from their pre-existing treatments resulted in enough money to buy out the company with a cure in full.
This is highly doubtful. GSK sells thousands of other products which could have resulted in the aforementioned enough money.
Yes, it could work, and your theory is a good beginning. Loopholes might have to be found and fixed.
It could work in the specific Chinese villages mentioned here - if there is a cultural taboo, even if a mild taboo, in getting sick. Or in being sicker than one would expect from your age. That taboo would itself be unfair - but societal taboos frequently are unfair.
What is the strategic use of the moon and planets? Please explain without using scifi or references to any Heinlein novel.
Hmmm. That seems quite difficult since any strategic use of the moon would have likely been covered in some sci-fi somewhere.
Without using sci-fi does not mean you cannot mention any use that is also incidentally covered in some sci-fi. Same goes for Heinlein novel, whatever Heinlein means.
If I write a use for something, and the use has something to do with a phone - and 3200 among the stories I have read also have a phone involvement : I am not really *using* the 3200 stories to write the use for that something.
"Insane" comes from your own post. "Retarded" from your imagination. And light can be out at any o'clock. So just work when light is out if it matters to you. My server was down at 3 am : light out did not matter.
Absolutely false. What is insane is the idea that just because it is certain o'clock, one must start working irrespective of sunlight, nature of work, season, health etc. Once this insane idea is gone, banks can work when it makes sense for banks to work, and agricultural irrigation water can be supplied when it makes sense for it to be supplied. And of course, schools in India can be and are ordered at district level to change their timings according to local conditions.
I was feeling sleepy today at 4pm. Shockingly, I just went to sleep instead of setting my clock to 10 pm before going to bed.
Slashdot Mirror
4-inch steel panels would sttop most bullets - but where would they transfer the momentum ? If your tank is standing / moving on the ground, your 4-inch steel panels just need to spread the impact of the bullets, and transfer momentum to the body of the tank. Body is standing on the ground with a lot of frictional force in most horizontal directions. For the vertical component of the impact of the bullet - compressive and tensile strength of the tank is enormous - supported by the hardness of the ground in the one direction, and gravity with hundred ton-weight force in the other direction.
When an object is trying to leave the earth / travelling around the earth all of these advantages vanish, or get drastically reduced. It gets billions of times lower friction from the atmosphere. Nothing extra to protect it in the vertical direction. It would surely keep getting misdirected significantly.
100 ton tank would barely get misdirected by pico-radians with a 30 g bullet at 1200 km / h. 100 ton satellite, while being much rarer than 100 ton tank and much more expensive to launch than usual size of satellites - would get misdirected by multiple tens of milli-radians with 30 g debris at 1200 km / h.
So, engineers would come up with a constantly steering design. Which might be more expensive than a design that fights the space debris back - detect using radar / optical / heat sensing : and shoot incoming debris using laser.
Naysayers will almost never win against engineers in the long term - but this is just an enormous cost increase for any space faring for no good reason.
On Amazon, it is useful to give real name as it helps in delivery and warranty / RMA. Amazon does not make it easy to give another name to publish your reviews under. There is not much reason for Amazon to make it easy, either. For not publicizing to the world what you bought, reviews need to come as AC on Amazon, or using another Amazon account.
There is a fundamental disconnect between one purchase one review, and privacy. Amazon might see it as increasing the number of reviews by even allowing privacy minded buyers to review in another name.
You yourself confused her. Telling someone "if you don't like the interface", raises the possibility of not liking it. Without having an alternative in mind, it was an extremely stupid thing to say.
The " standard " in this case is the default desktop that comes with the distro. Non technical users don't have specific requirements, so the default should work if there are no major bugs. If there are bugs that bother them, use an alternative. Chose any, more popular and mainstream ones more likely to succeed.
Not only is presumption of innocence not absolute - it survived and thrived only because law enforcement used to be difficult and expensive. It was a necessity , touted as deep philosophy
Finding wrong information should take much less than 30 seconds. If Forbes is saying 4 billion passengers flew in an year, it is wrong.
4 billion people have never seen an aircraft from close range , say, less than 30 metres.
In 2017 around 4 billion people on this planet flew in a plane
Liar. In last 100 years combined, 4 billion people have not flown in a plane. Some people, mostly among the richest 1 billion, keep flying multiple times, some about a hundred times per year.
You're an idiot.
1. There are 2 "pilot"s - one can easily look into the manual when the other pulls up the nose repeatedly.
2. Cars , at typical highway speeds, are surrounded by things into which it can crash in milliseconds. Aircraft after taking off - not so much.
3. "Pilot"s, both of them, are trained to look into specific sections of the manual when the need arises. Car drivers, not so much. Partly because of reasons 1 and 2 above.
4. If all else fails to convince you - you are just arguing against established, SOP. Which could have been established partly for reasons 1, 2 and 3 above.
No, that is only true for a very limited definition of "our". Very likely to miss at least one of you, the poster of the GP post, or me. The ancestors common to almost every human alive today had died about 100,000 years ago.
So you do see how it is a problem that such information is left on sold devices You just pretend not to see it to make a snarky post on /.
And our ancestors had a "large availability" of eggs ? You have some evidence for that - or your common sense has come to the rescue again ?
Our ancestors would even less refuse sugar. Would your common sense have an answer for "how much sugar should I eat each day" too ?
How can "critics" be more accurate , when the word, in plural and non-specific like you have put it, is extremely inaccurate ?
By definition, it includes the ACs on /. , the trolls on YouTube comment section, the "short sellers" that regularly frequent Musk's nightmares, and also somewhat technically qualified people. The latter, in my experience, have largely restricted themselves to mentioning the unlikelihood or unprecedentedness of some of Tesla's achievements. Or contradicted timelines of Tesla's profitability : which did slip a few times. Also, given the fundamental inaccuracy of tweets due to brevity: it is hard to know what kind of profitability Musk is claiming to attain by what time. This makes the critics criticise one interpretation of the tweet, and the fanboys extol another.
Some of the technically qualified commenters have been supportive of Tesla, but that makes them "non-critics", by definition.
A trailer containing a gasoline tanker and electricity generator can be designed in weeks. Next version of electric cars can contain a better inbuilt way of attaching such a trailer : though I think most of today's electric cars can attach a trailer, or can be modified in less than a few weeks to be able to attach a trailer.
Next, only the places which don't have super chargers need to have the gas pumps. It's a bit taxing on the economy of scale of the gas pumps : and gas prices might rise a bit, but may not be exorbitant.
Of course, Musk most likely hasn't thought of reachability, national security, or practically anything other than next week's stock price.
So many actors thought they were Atlases, and just "shrugged" ?
Actually 4.5 inch glass-and-steel rectangle is the ideal conduit for worldly experiences. 4 inch is too small, 5 inch too big.
How did this advocate of the wrong screen size even get on /. ?
So can you please fund all the scientists the trillions of dollars they need so they won't have to do this any more ?
You misunderstood. The study didn't say that 40+ pushups are positively correlated with being an "actual athlete". It says 40+ pushups are negatively correlated with heart disease.
BTW, being an actual athlete and heart disease are in turn negatively correlated - but it is not a perfect negative correlation. So the above 2 statements between which you conflated are not in effect identical.
What was the specific evidence for ? My shill-ness or something else? And what is the evidence ?
No we aren't.
A cure is less profitable than a treatment,
Is an unsupported statement until further evidence.
You could have said " A cure may be less profitable than a treatment,". But the other unsupported assumption in the same post is evidence for your inability to understand logic :
it's so much less profitable that the profits from their pre-existing treatments resulted in enough money to buy out the company with a cure in full.
Millions of reasons, and thousands of products could have resulted in the "enough money".
No, specific examples does not mean it is true. Odd numbers are prime numbers.
A competitor, maybe foreign, could discover the cure. Rendering the subscription useless.
A cure is less profitable than a treatment
You still need to prove this in the general case, though most people can think of specific examples where this is true.
In fact, it's so much less profitable that the profits from their pre-existing treatments resulted in enough money to buy out the company with a cure in full.
This is highly doubtful. GSK sells thousands of other products which could have resulted in the aforementioned enough money.
Yes, it could work, and your theory is a good beginning. Loopholes might have to be found and fixed.
It could work in the specific Chinese villages mentioned here - if there is a cultural taboo, even if a mild taboo, in getting sick. Or in being sicker than one would expect from your age. That taboo would itself be unfair - but societal taboos frequently are unfair.
What is the strategic use of the moon and planets? Please explain without using scifi or references to any Heinlein novel.
Hmmm. That seems quite difficult since any strategic use of the moon would have likely been covered in some sci-fi somewhere.
Without using sci-fi does not mean you cannot mention any use that is also incidentally covered in some sci-fi. Same goes for Heinlein novel, whatever Heinlein means.
If I write a use for something, and the use has something to do with a phone - and 3200 among the stories I have read also have a phone involvement : I am not really *using* the 3200 stories to write the use for that something.
"Insane" comes from your own post. "Retarded" from your imagination. And light can be out at any o'clock. So just work when light is out if it matters to you. My server was down at 3 am : light out did not matter.
Absolutely false. What is insane is the idea that just because it is certain o'clock, one must start working irrespective of sunlight, nature of work, season, health etc. Once this insane idea is gone, banks can work when it makes sense for banks to work, and agricultural irrigation water can be supplied when it makes sense for it to be supplied. And of course, schools in India can be and are ordered at district level to change their timings according to local conditions.
I was feeling sleepy today at 4pm. Shockingly, I just went to sleep instead of setting my clock to 10 pm before going to bed.
Stop the obsession about o'clocks.