A new day has dawned. The F-35 will obviously require different tactics, but those tactics are the reason it was developed. We no longer need to wipe out a dozen tanks, these days we need to kill a civilian truck without hurting the kids in the car next to it. NATO vs Warsaw is a bygone era and good riddance!
I'm not saying the A-10 is inferior at close air support but a fair contest could show a surprising strength for the F-35. A Fair contest that doesn't involve winning a large battle.
It's a new day, and with MOABs dropped from 50,000 feet, swarms of drones, and tactics that no longer lend themselves to capturing territory and destroying infrastructure willy-nilly (And good riddance!) new tools are needed. When we do need an area destroyed a single bomb is faster and cheaper than a thousand bullets.Let's not prepare for yesterday's war.
Until NASA's real, actual use-this-money budget comes in 20 year cycles it's just science fiction. Here is a chart of NASA's budget. I'm not going to say whether it's too much or too little in this comment, that's not the point. The big problem is NASA has no idea whether sequestration and budget games, the presidential fad this decade, or party politics is going to increase, eliminate, or do weird things with their budget. Maybe they'll have money for Orion or maybe the President will do away with it with the sweep of a pen. Maybe we can send up ten shuttles a month at a low cost per shuttle. Or maybe we'll have to cut that way, way back until the cost is hard to justify. From Mars to space stations to earth science the fad of the day dictates what NASA is building this year -- and worse, where it's building it.
There have been noises in the direction of stabilizing things and NASA is a fairly popular, if misunderstood, organization. But it's not enough. We need a NASA funding omnibus bill that sets NASA funds, be they generous or miserly, and NASA plans in stone.
Misanthropes and power hungry idiots in environmentalists clothing. They're a bigger danger to the environment than any other segment of humanity because they're standing directly in the way of real solutions.
Augmented reality involves mixing real life elements with virtual, to provide context and natural information throughput. A map on a wall, however interactive, is nothing related. If they had gone into further detail I would know more... for example if it was a window out on the city and the user could point at various places and receive information, that would be AR. I'm sure the reason they didn't go into detail is that further information would reiterate the lack of reality augmentation. Stop using buzzwords outside their definitions. Stop it!
Public transport in the US is a sad, sorry state, but blaming people who drive is stupid.
The busses in pretty much any US city don't exist, run up to an hour late, are filthy, require up to an hour waiting just to be sure you can catch the bus, and/or are insufficient in number.
Regulatory capturekeeps the rail industry barely alive with passenger lines several hundred miles apart in many, many places. Hell, if it weren't for war hawks supporting infrastructure in the cold war the US passenger rail system probably wouldn't even exist.
US cities are far apart relative to European countries. Therefore the economics are completely different. In particular it makes a lot more sense in the US to run four airplanes and a few hundred cars between two cities on a regular basis than to pay for the upkeep of such a long railroad.
Car ownership is a rite of passage in the US. Getting a license is one's first taste of freedom. In Japan you step outside, wait 5 minutes, a taxi will pass. In the US you have to call one and wait, and it's even more expensive. In the UK you walk two blocks to your train station. In the US? That's a laugh. In India and China cheap labor provides bicycle cabs. My point is, culturally in the US a car is just how people get around and that's okay!
To change from a car culture in the US to use of public transportation would cost many billions of dollars, a major shift in values, and reducing or eliminating the influence of lobbyists. So sure, blame me as a driver. Because it's my fault that driving my 20 year old car costs half what I would pay for taxi's. Because I don't want to sit on someone's wank stain. Because taking a bus would require walking 8 blocks each way and waiting an hour and a half each time. Because the nearest railroad is on the other side of my city. Because the grocery store within walking distance costs three times as much for the same basket of goods. Yup, I don't care about any of that. The real reason I drive a car is that I want things a little warmer.
Retaliation? This would essentially declare a new er of corporate v corporate cyber warfare with no holds barred and a referee paid by the highest bidder.
Windows "free" edition will write home about pretty much everything you do. The default settings send Microsoft ya unique device ID with everything you type, everything you say, every link you click, and every file name. The settings you can't change send less to Microsoft but still way too much. I'm not comfortable with this level of reporting. More importantly I'm not comfortable with Microsoft having the option (updates you can't disable) to ratchet that up. I'm not a frog for Microsoft's pot.
That alone is reason for me to either pay for the non-shit version or only run it on a separate computer for testing and learning the OS. It looks like a fine OS, but it's not a free OS.
Read their privacy policy here, it's a litany of ass covering that boils down to, "we'll collect all the data we can and use it any way we please but hey, we won't send you ads that creep you out".
Uptime, heartbeats, and operational error codes can be transferred one-way and offer very little for an attacker to use. And the executives probably don't care whether the condenser is running security patch.0034 or.0036. So I'm thinking the real problem isn't sending out plant data but an unwillingness to invest in security in general.
I trust the name Toshiba. But I can't help but think any company aiming at the budged SSD market will skimp on wear leveling in favor of other attributes. Yes I saw the 7% overprovisioning note, but that was the whole of the attention given to a rather complex topic.
I wouldn't mind the somewhat slower access noted but in recommending an SSD for general system use I would be wary if a drive couldn't handle large volumes of throughput over its lifetime. Modern applications, not even Windows 8, are careful with disk usage. For example Windows 8 is happy to use an average 2% of drive access time for record-keeping alone on my own PC (I had to disable services to make that stop)
The average user is still running 15 junkware applications that tend to be written with any consideration but the user in mind. How much more important is it for them to minimize disk wear for an SSD? Since they're not, the'll need drives that can hack it. I saw numerous benchmarks in the fine article, but not the kind about which I care the most.
So I looked it up myself. Ten minutes of Googling found some information for other OCZ drives, but not this one. The only other thing I can add is this table of return rates for previous editions.
You're wrong. No matter how much experience shooters have or how well they control the voluntary side of their muscles there is some shake that just can't be trained out. That's why we wrap the sling around our left arms.
It's also a mistake to call this a training aid. Obviously if you need it to control involuntary shakes on the firing range you'll need it in the field.
I can add a little perspective to this. In Japan there is a very high (over 99%) conviction rate of arrested people. This is for two reasons. Japanese police tend not to arrest someone unless there's more than enough evidence to convict, and to save face Japanese courts tends to convict all edge cases. Innocent until proven guilty is only true in theory in the Japanese system.
The bounce video does not demonstrate the ideal mater for a phone casing unless it's the frame that breaks. Note how their alloy bounces a long time. That means it's hardly deforming under the pressure at all, and immediately returning the kinetic energy. You want that in a golf ball. You probably don't want that in a car frame or a cell phone.
The frame will be very robust, but at the cost of transferring all energy to the internal components. Fewer will break due to a deforming case but that's not why your phone breaks.
It's not the ideal material for today's phones but the material could be the first step in a new, very robust kind of phone design. If the components are cushioned with energy-absorbing structural elements (don't screw the motherboard directly to the case) then the phone's durability is no longer a function of case or component durability but of clever kinetic energy management.
Youtube blogging is stupid in another way, and it's structural. Since it's so easy to get ad revenue from youtube and so difficult from regular advertising people are increasingly using the wrong medium for their messages.
Got a list? Make it a video! A paragraph of text? Video! Series of static pictures? One picture and a line of text for a FAQ? Two bar charts? video, video, video! And watch that revenue pour in. It's fucking ridiculous and it's transparent. Don't use video format unless your information is best presented by video dammit!
I may be posting this to late to get any visibility, but I have to try.
Voat is out of money. They took donations via Paypal until their account was suspended for unspecified reasons. They also suffered two massive DDOS attacks and has to pay out the wazoo to get on Cloudflair. Opponents of free speech play dirty.
Voat does not have ANY INCOME and servers can get expensive. The only way they can stay up is if a lot of people give them bitcoin. Their wallet is:
You may have read the report of the USS Srark. This was a US naval ship fired on by an Iraqi F1. The facts of the case are that it was fired on and hit by two missiles and never fired a shot in defense or revenge. The captain was indicted and several officers were drummed out of the Navy. The official inquiry essentially blamed the ships officers. I looked more deeply into the matter a few months ago when I wanted to find out about possible reasons these guys weren't blown out of the water. Back to that later.
My research on the Stark indicated that most of the ship's defensive systems including two kinds of fire control radar and the PHALANX CIWS were offline awaiting parts or maintenance that needed to be done by a contractor in port.. The real cause of the ship's poor performance under fire was accounting procedures designed to provide an 80% readiness/50% cost solution. Instead of acknowledging the cause the Navy chose to blame the closest people to the incident and call it done.
Now the piracy incident. First, one of the comments says the pirates were in the big boat and the rafts were US Navy attacking it. I don't believe this to be true. I looked up comments on several forums found a consensus agreeing with a Youtube comment:
This happened in 2006, the ship in the video is the USS Cape St George and then video was shot from the USS Gonzalez. They didn't try to attack or board anything, we sent a boarding team to talk to them and they pointed an RPG at us. All of the mounts kept jamming because they had old shitty ammo sitting on them exposed to the weather for months and there are no sights on those weapons (you're supposed to walk fire onto targets, difficult to do when your weapon jams every 3 rounds). Source: I was there
The consensus was that the ammunition on the firing ship hadn't been properly kept dry, and was old. This causes jams. And they didn't do enough live-fire exercises to be able to reliably prevent this problem. Again, an 80%/50% solution. This isn't to say it's easy to hit small rafts in the dark with a jamming weapon but that's not the point. The Navy has all the latest whizbangery and night vision gear. Those rafts should have been shot up by the third burst.
A third happenstance, part of the Stark incident IIRC: The ship was carrying old missiles and had to dump them into the sea ASAP. This prevented returning fire on the attacking jet. My conclusion is that the US Navy has a firmly entrenched culture of saving money at the cost of readiness.
All that said: Why should we believe that if general military readiness is flagging to save costs in official government programs the government would do any better than these contractors? A choice has to be made and stuck to: budget or safety. The half assing, ass grabbing, and ass covering needs to stop.
The question of anthropomorphic global warming and evolution can be studied and understood on a factual basis as can whether vaccines help. Whether vaccines should be required is not a question for science to answer. The summary conflates matters of fact and matters of judgement.
The development money is gone. Who you blame the loss on is irrelevant to that. Emotional attachment to lost money is one of the biggest problems plaguing any large organization. The question isn't whether we should add money to a very expensive (but not a trillion dollars, that includes projected maintenance) project.
The question is, given the platform available right now is it worth it to spend money correcting deficiencies, or would it be more cost-effective to take another option, from re-engineering the F-15 to starting all over again. I don't know the answer to this question but by bringing up past cost as if it were relevant and by adding future costs the writer of this article showed a bias that makes me disregard the whole thing. This isn't a policy piece, it's a hit piece.
That's an interesting point, but surely since cutting off peripheral vision eliminates a source of information those without will be more accident prone despite being able to make up for much of it by looking back and forth and making better guesses about what's there.
Slashdot Mirror
A new day has dawned. The F-35 will obviously require different tactics, but those tactics are the reason it was developed. We no longer need to wipe out a dozen tanks, these days we need to kill a civilian truck without hurting the kids in the car next to it. NATO vs Warsaw is a bygone era and good riddance!
I'm not saying the A-10 is inferior at close air support but a fair contest could show a surprising strength for the F-35. A Fair contest that doesn't involve winning a large battle.
It's a new day, and with MOABs dropped from 50,000 feet, swarms of drones, and tactics that no longer lend themselves to capturing territory and destroying infrastructure willy-nilly (And good riddance!) new tools are needed. When we do need an area destroyed a single bomb is faster and cheaper than a thousand bullets.Let's not prepare for yesterday's war.
Until NASA's real, actual use-this-money budget comes in 20 year cycles it's just science fiction. Here is a chart of NASA's budget. I'm not going to say whether it's too much or too little in this comment, that's not the point. The big problem is NASA has no idea whether sequestration and budget games, the presidential fad this decade, or party politics is going to increase, eliminate, or do weird things with their budget. Maybe they'll have money for Orion or maybe the President will do away with it with the sweep of a pen. Maybe we can send up ten shuttles a month at a low cost per shuttle. Or maybe we'll have to cut that way, way back until the cost is hard to justify. From Mars to space stations to earth science the fad of the day dictates what NASA is building this year -- and worse, where it's building it.
There have been noises in the direction of stabilizing things and NASA is a fairly popular, if misunderstood, organization. But it's not enough. We need a NASA funding omnibus bill that sets NASA funds, be they generous or miserly, and NASA plans in stone.
No description of the algorithm. No performance measurements. No solid data. No useful information. No story.
Misanthropes and power hungry idiots in environmentalists clothing. They're a bigger danger to the environment than any other segment of humanity because they're standing directly in the way of real solutions.
Meanwhile it's completely legal for members of Congress to inside trade
Augmented reality involves mixing real life elements with virtual, to provide context and natural information throughput. A map on a wall, however interactive, is nothing related. If they had gone into further detail I would know more... for example if it was a window out on the city and the user could point at various places and receive information, that would be AR. I'm sure the reason they didn't go into detail is that further information would reiterate the lack of reality augmentation. Stop using buzzwords outside their definitions. Stop it!
Now if only getting a warrant were an obstacle...
Public transport in the US is a sad, sorry state, but blaming people who drive is stupid.
To change from a car culture in the US to use of public transportation would cost many billions of dollars, a major shift in values, and reducing or eliminating the influence of lobbyists. So sure, blame me as a driver. Because it's my fault that driving my 20 year old car costs half what I would pay for taxi's. Because I don't want to sit on someone's wank stain. Because taking a bus would require walking 8 blocks each way and waiting an hour and a half each time. Because the nearest railroad is on the other side of my city. Because the grocery store within walking distance costs three times as much for the same basket of goods. Yup, I don't care about any of that. The real reason I drive a car is that I want things a little warmer.
Retaliation? This would essentially declare a new er of corporate v corporate cyber warfare with no holds barred and a referee paid by the highest bidder.
Windows "free" edition will write home about pretty much everything you do. The default settings send Microsoft ya unique device ID with everything you type, everything you say, every link you click, and every file name. The settings you can't change send less to Microsoft but still way too much. I'm not comfortable with this level of reporting. More importantly I'm not comfortable with Microsoft having the option (updates you can't disable) to ratchet that up. I'm not a frog for Microsoft's pot.
That alone is reason for me to either pay for the non-shit version or only run it on a separate computer for testing and learning the OS. It looks like a fine OS, but it's not a free OS.
linky
linky
linky
Read their privacy policy here, it's a litany of ass covering that boils down to, "we'll collect all the data we can and use it any way we please but hey, we won't send you ads that creep you out".
Uptime, heartbeats, and operational error codes can be transferred one-way and offer very little for an attacker to use. And the executives probably don't care whether the condenser is running security patch .0034 or .0036. So I'm thinking the real problem isn't sending out plant data but an unwillingness to invest in security in general.
festering cesspit like 8chan
Your bias is showing.
I was hung over. I was wrong. I see Slashdot largely defended itself against Wu, and apologize for attacking it. Also I'm not out. But fuck Wu.
I'm out. Enjoy your SJW echo chamber.
I trust the name Toshiba. But I can't help but think any company aiming at the budged SSD market will skimp on wear leveling in favor of other attributes. Yes I saw the 7% overprovisioning note, but that was the whole of the attention given to a rather complex topic.
I wouldn't mind the somewhat slower access noted but in recommending an SSD for general system use I would be wary if a drive couldn't handle large volumes of throughput over its lifetime. Modern applications, not even Windows 8, are careful with disk usage. For example Windows 8 is happy to use an average 2% of drive access time for record-keeping alone on my own PC (I had to disable services to make that stop)
The average user is still running 15 junkware applications that tend to be written with any consideration but the user in mind. How much more important is it for them to minimize disk wear for an SSD? Since they're not, the'll need drives that can hack it. I saw numerous benchmarks in the fine article, but not the kind about which I care the most.
So I looked it up myself. Ten minutes of Googling found some information for other OCZ drives, but not this one. The only other thing I can add is this table of return rates for previous editions.
You're wrong. No matter how much experience shooters have or how well they control the voluntary side of their muscles there is some shake that just can't be trained out. That's why we wrap the sling around our left arms.
It's also a mistake to call this a training aid. Obviously if you need it to control involuntary shakes on the firing range you'll need it in the field.
I can add a little perspective to this. In Japan there is a very high (over 99%) conviction rate of arrested people. This is for two reasons. Japanese police tend not to arrest someone unless there's more than enough evidence to convict, and to save face Japanese courts tends to convict all edge cases. Innocent until proven guilty is only true in theory in the Japanese system.
The bounce video does not demonstrate the ideal mater for a phone casing unless it's the frame that breaks. Note how their alloy bounces a long time. That means it's hardly deforming under the pressure at all, and immediately returning the kinetic energy. You want that in a golf ball. You probably don't want that in a car frame or a cell phone.
The frame will be very robust, but at the cost of transferring all energy to the internal components. Fewer will break due to a deforming case but that's not why your phone breaks.
It's not the ideal material for today's phones but the material could be the first step in a new, very robust kind of phone design. If the components are cushioned with energy-absorbing structural elements (don't screw the motherboard directly to the case) then the phone's durability is no longer a function of case or component durability but of clever kinetic energy management.
If they're using a print, it's not much harder to make a gummy bear. This is like adding a reinforced door lock and ignoring your $2 hinges.
Youtube blogging is stupid in another way, and it's structural. Since it's so easy to get ad revenue from youtube and so difficult from regular advertising people are increasingly using the wrong medium for their messages.
Got a list? Make it a video! A paragraph of text? Video! Series of static pictures? One picture and a line of text for a FAQ? Two bar charts? video, video, video! And watch that revenue pour in. It's fucking ridiculous and it's transparent. Don't use video format unless your information is best presented by video dammit!
I may be posting this to late to get any visibility, but I have to try.
Voat is out of money. They took donations via Paypal until their account was suspended for unspecified reasons. They also suffered two massive DDOS attacks and has to pay out the wazoo to get on Cloudflair. Opponents of free speech play dirty.
Voat does not have ANY INCOME and servers can get expensive. The only way they can stay up is if a lot of people give them bitcoin. Their wallet is:
1C4Q1RvUb3bzk4aaLVgGccnSnaHYFdESzY
source: https://twitter.com/voatco/sta...
I hope those who value freedom of expression will take the Bitcoin plunge and donate.
You may have read the report of the USS Srark. This was a US naval ship fired on by an Iraqi F1. The facts of the case are that it was fired on and hit by two missiles and never fired a shot in defense or revenge. The captain was indicted and several officers were drummed out of the Navy. The official inquiry essentially blamed the ships officers. I looked more deeply into the matter a few months ago when I wanted to find out about possible reasons these guys weren't blown out of the water. Back to that later.
My research on the Stark indicated that most of the ship's defensive systems including two kinds of fire control radar and the PHALANX CIWS were offline awaiting parts or maintenance that needed to be done by a contractor in port.. The real cause of the ship's poor performance under fire was accounting procedures designed to provide an 80% readiness/50% cost solution. Instead of acknowledging the cause the Navy chose to blame the closest people to the incident and call it done.
Now the piracy incident. First, one of the comments says the pirates were in the big boat and the rafts were US Navy attacking it. I don't believe this to be true. I looked up comments on several forums found a consensus agreeing with a Youtube comment:
This happened in 2006, the ship in the video is the USS Cape St George and then video was shot from the USS Gonzalez. They didn't try to attack or board anything, we sent a boarding team to talk to them and they pointed an RPG at us. All of the mounts kept jamming because they had old shitty ammo sitting on them exposed to the weather for months and there are no sights on those weapons (you're supposed to walk fire onto targets, difficult to do when your weapon jams every 3 rounds). Source: I was there
The consensus was that the ammunition on the firing ship hadn't been properly kept dry, and was old. This causes jams. And they didn't do enough live-fire exercises to be able to reliably prevent this problem. Again, an 80%/50% solution. This isn't to say it's easy to hit small rafts in the dark with a jamming weapon but that's not the point. The Navy has all the latest whizbangery and night vision gear. Those rafts should have been shot up by the third burst.
A third happenstance, part of the Stark incident IIRC: The ship was carrying old missiles and had to dump them into the sea ASAP. This prevented returning fire on the attacking jet. My conclusion is that the US Navy has a firmly entrenched culture of saving money at the cost of readiness.
incomplete source: http://www.jag.navy.mil/librar...
All that said: Why should we believe that if general military readiness is flagging to save costs in official government programs the government would do any better than these contractors? A choice has to be made and stuck to: budget or safety. The half assing, ass grabbing, and ass covering needs to stop.
The question of anthropomorphic global warming and evolution can be studied and understood on a factual basis as can whether vaccines help. Whether vaccines should be required is not a question for science to answer. The summary conflates matters of fact and matters of judgement.
The development money is gone. Who you blame the loss on is irrelevant to that. Emotional attachment to lost money is one of the biggest problems plaguing any large organization. The question isn't whether we should add money to a very expensive (but not a trillion dollars, that includes projected maintenance) project.
The question is, given the platform available right now is it worth it to spend money correcting deficiencies, or would it be more cost-effective to take another option, from re-engineering the F-15 to starting all over again. I don't know the answer to this question but by bringing up past cost as if it were relevant and by adding future costs the writer of this article showed a bias that makes me disregard the whole thing. This isn't a policy piece, it's a hit piece.
That's an interesting point, but surely since cutting off peripheral vision eliminates a source of information those without will be more accident prone despite being able to make up for much of it by looking back and forth and making better guesses about what's there.