Actually they do have the A-10 Warthog. It's the first (and thusfar only) fixed wing aircraft the US inventory that was designed primarily for ground assault.
What building could say "no" to a 30mm gatling gun firing at 3900 rounds per minute?
The word seems to be an obscure military jargon term. The earliest citation seems to be in 1986. Though I seem to recall the word being used in texts dating back to WWI.
Um, Nasa beat you to the idea on both counts. In fact they have an entire system called the Deep Space Network that uses an adapted form of TCP/IP to relay information around the solar system. (Adapted because TCP/IP normally cacks when delays exceed 2 minutes. Travel time for signals around the solar system can be hours or days.)
Yes, but not nearly enough for a neural network complex enough to mimic the human brain when... [this post terminated for violating the time traveler act of 2143]
If you read the rest of the article you would see that the union is a smidgeon of the pay difference. The main difference (PER YOUR ARTICLE) is the size of the plane. A pilot at ExecuJet is flying a 20 passenger lear jet. A pilot at United is flying a 500 passenger 777.
Oh, and the United pilot has 12 years of experience, specialized training on said airplane, a pile of certifications, and flies about 1200 hours per year.
The Dot.com had nothing to do with the compesation packages of pilots. The deals were negotiated back when airlines actually charged what it REALLY cost them to fly, rather than try to starve each other out of business with preditory pricing.
Airline pilots are the highest paid people in the world? Bullhockey. CEO's, and their armies of yes men are paid many times what even the most senior tradesman is paid.
The Airline industry is in a race to the bottom because they are trying to kill each other off, to that one can emerge as a monopoly. They selectively compete, and where they can find an oppertunity to stuff the customer they do.
He took us on a nice long journey. Segued into the stock market, and lampooned labor intensive paper handling.
Logistics are logistics. The problems he cited were poor logistical planning. They ran the entire Roman Empire on beads, wax, and animal skin. The supply system for the US Pacific fleet in WWII ran on paper cards and morse code.
The trick is to scale your solution properly. NASDAQ's original advantage was not being digital, it was being a smaller operation at a time when NYSE's growth outstripped it's ability to cope. JetBlue's advantage was not being digital, it was about being a smaller operation in a cuthroat market.
Computers are a tool, they are not a solution. A poorely design logistical system is a poorely designed logistical system, no matter if it's on paper or on a Mainframe.
This works. In fact I'm typing this message in through Lynx on a Linux box daisy chained through34pqioer[oq3974bn544qeeerqaERFQERT$%@#$TE15 1
^H
*** Carrier Lost ***
I've found that there are no small failures in IT. You have your $400 "I bought the wrong part" and the $400,000,000 "we farmed out this major project and got crap" with very little in between.
Burpie seed put all its eggs into a basket with a new inventory/sales/everything for everybody system. It didn't work. They lost a LOT of money in lost sales, on top if the bales of money that were burned on the project itself.
It's projects like this that make me scratch my head and say WTF?
Large organizations are only truely served by in-house developed software. The trick is for said organizations to hire folks who really know what they are doing.
I can generally tell when a project is going to fail. The whole process begins with sending the project out for bid. For specific projects, yes, farm it out. There is no need to write your own relational database. If you don't have a Unix weenie in-house, it is cheap at twice the price to farm out hosting.
But making up a wishlist for projects with 100,000s of thousands of users and 10,000s of thousands of uses is just asking to be ripped off.
SCO, perhaps, belongs in the Evil catagory. But Microsoft is really in the category with Comcast, Lockheed Martin, and Verizon. They should get a Roman legion standard. Better living through conquest. (As opposed to innovation.)
You can park an Xserve into a special mode that simply serves up the hard drive arrays as a firewire device. Add a firewire cable and an OS X laptop, and you can boot your server from the laptops CD rom drive, and still get in to play with the partition map, raid setup and whatnot inside the server.
Once you get beyond playing with partition maps, and installing the OS, you are either diagnosing a crash (the reset button is my tool of choice), or looking for the LED that tells you what part to swap out.
Mac Xservers have no video card. They are designed to run completely headless, and come with a CD with the software that will allow you to completely operate them from a laptop running OS X.
This includes software install, firware flashing, repartitioning hard drives, etc. If you can't do it over the network, you can connect the server via firewire and call up the hard drive array like you would an iPod or an external drive.
If you install VNC on the server, you can call up the desktop and play with the programs as if it were a regular Mac. I find that 99% of what I need to do is done over SSH, or with the remote management tools.
Our windows PDCs are either an OS X box running Samba, or a Gentoo box running Samba. (Depends on which domain.)
Well if they are serving a useful role, you would be obligated to feed them. If not obligated, then at the very least it would be in our elightened best interest.
If the issue is that we created a self replicating organism that outstripped its usefulness, we would be perfectly in our rights to treat it like any other verman. Rats are pretty damn intelligent, but people don't exactly picket when you lay out traps.
Eating may not be the way to go, but drinking certainly would be.
There are few energy storage systems with the energy density of hydrocarbons like petrolium or alchohols. They would "metabolize" the liquid hydrocarbons, and exhale water vapor and CO2, much like their masters.
With enough research, you could develop a "gut" that will process everything from vegatable oil to high-proof whiskey. The concept behind "Bender" the robot from Futurama really isn't that far off.
(Though, when processing any fuel in an impure form, you will end up with waste water and paticulate that would have to be cleaned out every once in a while.)
Humans do not enslave fellow humans because they are functionally, physically, intellectually, and emotionally equivilent to themselves. All arguments for the abolishment of slavery are based on the concept of human rights.
A robot, designed by man, to serve man, does not have rights. The legal system would treat it in much the same way that it treats animals. Animals are the undesputed property of their owner, and the law only intervenes in cases of cruelty or when one persons property damages another persons property.
What you say? Intelligence does not grant computers rights? I say no. If it turns out intelligence doesn't require emotion, we would simply build computers without it. A machine without emotion can't feel resentment.
Now, if it turns out that functional intelligent requires emotion, would be cruel to create a being that is capable of understanding its lack of freedom? No. First off, the psyche of the creature is an artificial construction. Rather than resent servitude, a computer could easily be engineered with a emotional requirement for it. Serving mankind would give the computer the same warm fuzzies that you and I derive from a hug or a nice cup of coffee.
And if that fails, just equip the machine with the electronic brain equivilent to morphine. A bit that, when set, make the brain "feel good". Give each master of a machine a remote with a purple "operant conditioning" button, and if the computer starts feeling out of sorts, give him/her/it a shot of "juice". Who can stay mad?
Slashdot Mirror
That's OK. The Altarian fleet, after a several thousand year journey will arrive on Earth. Only to be swallowed by a small dog.
What building could say "no" to a 30mm gatling gun firing at 3900 rounds per minute?
The word seems to be an obscure military jargon term. The earliest citation seems to be in 1986. Though I seem to recall the word being used in texts dating back to WWI.
Um, Nasa beat you to the idea on both counts. In fact they have an entire system called the Deep Space Network that uses an adapted form of TCP/IP to relay information around the solar system. (Adapted because TCP/IP normally cacks when delays exceed 2 minutes. Travel time for signals around the solar system can be hours or days.)
Yes, but not nearly enough for a neural network complex enough to mimic the human brain when ... [this post terminated for violating the time traveler act of 2143]
Air force general: (watching his tactical monitoring system skip and slop.) Damn Lag!
... but it sounds like they are putting a wood shop in orbit. I guess the need pretty bevels or something.
(Point taken)
Oh, and the United pilot has 12 years of experience, specialized training on said airplane, a pile of certifications, and flies about 1200 hours per year.
The Dot.com had nothing to do with the compesation packages of pilots. The deals were negotiated back when airlines actually charged what it REALLY cost them to fly, rather than try to starve each other out of business with preditory pricing.
The Airline industry is in a race to the bottom because they are trying to kill each other off, to that one can emerge as a monopoly. They selectively compete, and where they can find an oppertunity to stuff the customer they do.
Logistics are logistics. The problems he cited were poor logistical planning. They ran the entire Roman Empire on beads, wax, and animal skin. The supply system for the US Pacific fleet in WWII ran on paper cards and morse code.
The trick is to scale your solution properly. NASDAQ's original advantage was not being digital, it was being a smaller operation at a time when NYSE's growth outstripped it's ability to cope. JetBlue's advantage was not being digital, it was about being a smaller operation in a cuthroat market.
Computers are a tool, they are not a solution. A poorely design logistical system is a poorely designed logistical system, no matter if it's on paper or on a Mainframe.
(clickty CLICKITY clickity)
And IBM was once known for typewriters. What is your point?
This works. In fact I'm typing this message in through Lynx on a Linux box daisy chained through34pqioer[oq3974bn544qeeerqaERFQERT$%@#$TE15 1
^H
*** Carrier Lost ***
Yup. The Xserves are the first Mac I've seen in years with a DB9 serial port.
Burpie seed put all its eggs into a basket with a new inventory/sales/everything for everybody system. It didn't work. They lost a LOT of money in lost sales, on top if the bales of money that were burned on the project itself.
Large organizations are only truely served by in-house developed software. The trick is for said organizations to hire folks who really know what they are doing.
I can generally tell when a project is going to fail. The whole process begins with sending the project out for bid. For specific projects, yes, farm it out. There is no need to write your own relational database. If you don't have a Unix weenie in-house, it is cheap at twice the price to farm out hosting.
But making up a wishlist for projects with 100,000s of thousands of users and 10,000s of thousands of uses is just asking to be ripped off.
SCO, perhaps, belongs in the Evil catagory. But Microsoft is really in the category with Comcast, Lockheed Martin, and Verizon. They should get a Roman legion standard. Better living through conquest. (As opposed to innovation.)
(clickity clickity clickity)
You can park an Xserve into a special mode that simply serves up the hard drive arrays as a firewire device. Add a firewire cable and an OS X laptop, and you can boot your server from the laptops CD rom drive, and still get in to play with the partition map, raid setup and whatnot inside the server.
Once you get beyond playing with partition maps, and installing the OS, you are either diagnosing a crash (the reset button is my tool of choice), or looking for the LED that tells you what part to swap out.
This includes software install, firware flashing, repartitioning hard drives, etc. If you can't do it over the network, you can connect the server via firewire and call up the hard drive array like you would an iPod or an external drive.
If you install VNC on the server, you can call up the desktop and play with the programs as if it were a regular Mac. I find that 99% of what I need to do is done over SSH, or with the remote management tools.
Our windows PDCs are either an OS X box running Samba, or a Gentoo box running Samba. (Depends on which domain.)
If the issue is that we created a self replicating organism that outstripped its usefulness, we would be perfectly in our rights to treat it like any other verman. Rats are pretty damn intelligent, but people don't exactly picket when you lay out traps.
There are few energy storage systems with the energy density of hydrocarbons like petrolium or alchohols. They would "metabolize" the liquid hydrocarbons, and exhale water vapor and CO2, much like their masters.
With enough research, you could develop a "gut" that will process everything from vegatable oil to high-proof whiskey. The concept behind "Bender" the robot from Futurama really isn't that far off.
(Though, when processing any fuel in an impure form, you will end up with waste water and paticulate that would have to be cleaned out every once in a while.)
Humans do not enslave fellow humans because they are functionally, physically, intellectually, and emotionally equivilent to themselves. All arguments for the abolishment of slavery are based on the concept of human rights.
A robot, designed by man, to serve man, does not have rights. The legal system would treat it in much the same way that it treats animals. Animals are the undesputed property of their owner, and the law only intervenes in cases of cruelty or when one persons property damages another persons property.
What you say? Intelligence does not grant computers rights? I say no. If it turns out intelligence doesn't require emotion, we would simply build computers without it. A machine without emotion can't feel resentment.
Now, if it turns out that functional intelligent requires emotion, would be cruel to create a being that is capable of understanding its lack of freedom? No. First off, the psyche of the creature is an artificial construction. Rather than resent servitude, a computer could easily be engineered with a emotional requirement for it. Serving mankind would give the computer the same warm fuzzies that you and I derive from a hug or a nice cup of coffee.
And if that fails, just equip the machine with the electronic brain equivilent to morphine. A bit that, when set, make the brain "feel good". Give each master of a machine a remote with a purple "operant conditioning" button, and if the computer starts feeling out of sorts, give him/her/it a shot of "juice". Who can stay mad?