I'd like to think this is part of a clever American plan for world domination by convincing the rest of the planet that force fields and intelligent robots and starships are real through decades of pushing science fiction and fantasy movies, books, and television shows, thereby turning the rest of the planet into gullible saps. I really would like to think that. Unfortunately, it seems some of us are starting to believe our own propaganda here, so I'm not sure.
I'm sure that no one will blab anything of interest to an adversary government.
Jesus, come on guys. How many "anonymous users" have posted an Ask Slashdot about some arcane details about US cyber security in the past 20 years? Think before you flap your lips, eh?
Well, if you leave out the part about where, actually they really were armed, or were high as a kite, or had just held up a convenience store and were trying to get away, or started the fights that led to their deaths in the first place, or were waving around a (very real looking toy) gun in a public park and had had the police called on them, or any combination of the above, then sure, yeah, I could see how you think Kaepernick is on target.
But yeah, if you ignore all that context, and ignore all the "unarmed" white people who get themselves killed by similar methods, then sure, why not?
Okay snowflake, let me clue you in to how freedom works. Kaepernick and co are perfectly free to give a big fat middle finger to the flag at every opportunity. And everyone else is free to give them a big fat middle finger right back and to point out that their protest is predicated on, at best, questionable facts. To put it politely.
In China and places like it, you say something nasty about the government, you get jailed.
Has been since new ownership. All click-bait headlines and not an ounce of adult vocabulary or even basic copy-editing to catch grammar or spelling errors.
Sometimes just copy-and-pasted headlines from other click-bait factories. Shame really. Comments section still has good people and you occasionally learn something. But the whining kids have increased in number. Probably baited by the clickbait headlines. C'est la vie.
What's so difficult to understand about "I need an experienced person with experience in the problem domain I'm hiring him for, so I will not consider people whose only qualification is being bright-eyed and bushy-tailed and having racked up exactly zero real-world experience" that you feel the need to jump down my throat? Is it because you have no real-world experience and expect job offers to jump down your pants by virtue of having a piece of paper from a highfallutin university and nothing else?
I've seen plenty of kids start work. I've been one myself. I'm pretty freakin smart if I do say so myself but I remember that it took me a good four or five years before I became useful. Not because I didn't know what I was doing (though there is that...there's a ton of technical stuff they don't teach in school) but because I hadn't had the experience of working in teams with and for other people. I've seen that pattern repeated to five decimal places with every kid that got hired on after me. Some positions are entry-level. This one wasn't.
Moment of inertia goes like size squared. So your 5" mini will be much more agile than the 5 ft whatever in the video. That means it canhave that tight PID loop because the rotational equivalent of the thrust-to-weight ratio (ie torque to moment) is so much higher for the smaller vehicle. Like I said above, the sweetspot for manned vehicles favors larger, because what you lose in control authority you make up for in not needing it since you're so big and apt to stay put in the presence of disturbance. For unmanned, you can and should go small. Ain't nothin' more agile than a hummingbird.
Helicopter rotors aren't rigid to the body of the vehicle, there's a little flexibility built into it. That's so that the big spinning gyroscope that is the rotor can keep its orientation. That's why it is more correct to think of it as hanging from its rotor. The quadcoptor rotors are rigid and tilt with the vehicle. It's more like a rocket, like another poster below has said.
It's a stretch to say you'd've "just graduated" in the same way that a kid with college and less than two years of experience on his resume "just graduated."
This thing sucks. With the guy sitting up above the plane of the rotor (or hanging down below), the moment of inertia is about as high as it gets, meaning the control authority of the rotors is lower. At the same time, sitting up that high, the lever arm for the aerodynamic force from wind disturbances catching the rider are maximized. Side-to-side the baseline between the rotors is lower than front-to-back. That's why you see him wobble side-to-side when he flew down the parking lot.
These statements generally hold true for all aircraft, which is why larger aircraft are "safer" from a wind gust perspective than smaller aircraft. So what we've got here is something that's pretty bad from a stability perspective being pitched for an application where agility is necessary and the wind gust environment around them skyscrapers in the desert is potentially quite severe.
Of course I can. I put out a req for ten years experience and I got back a resume that says just finished college. Why am I going to waste my time on a kid when I need a someone with a track record?
RTFA. The incentives may be the same (in kind, if not in degree), but here there are strong disincentives from faking shit that don't exist over there.
That's why I have a brake pedal lock that I use religiously on my ten year old Chevy and my wife's brand new VW. Yeah you can get into the car, but you can't drive off with it. The VW has a fatter brake pedal lever than my Chevy, so the lock doesn't fit as well, but it's still more work for a thief that I'd rather be there than not.
We needed to hire another coder a few years back. One of our greybeards said, "don't just look at resumes and gauge the firmness of their handshakes, make them take a coding test." So I wrote one up that specifically tested the skills we needed the new pair of hands for that fit onto six pages of good old-fashioned paper.
We got six bites for the position through our usual staffing firms. Three were kids barely old enough to go drinking with, so they're out because we needed someone to work, not to be taught to work, and three guys with about a decade plus. All three had impeccable resumes.
The first guy could barely figure out which way was up on the pages I gave him. The second figured out which side of the page was up but promptly got more than half the questions wrong. The last one promptly got slightly less than half the questions wrong. That's the guy we went with, and we lucked out because he learned quickly and has done good work for us.
The first guy, in the process of revealing to us that he couldn't tell C++ from a hole in the ground also came up with this gem among his many grumblings: "This code test is awful! You could get someone at way less than my rate to come up with it!"
The moral of this story: we've all interviewed Guy Number 1 at some point in our careers. Complaints about other people ruining your work and not being able to provide code samples because whateverwhatever will set off alarm bells. You need to prove you can code by yourself. If that means something as simple as maintaining a personal webpage where you just experiment with stuff, do it. If that means contributing to OSS, do it. If that means offering to take any and all code tests during an interview, do it. But what you don't want to do is start the interview with whining and complaining. Even if you're right, you'll be lumped in with all the jackasses that are all bluster and no technical competence and you won't even make it to the interview.
Then there's the fact that the more protocols and policies you have, the fewer of them are actually going to be implemented. Good security is just the right amount. Not so little that your passwords are left on default, no so much that no one gets around to changing the default passwords because they're busy checking all the other boxes and figuring out ways to get their work done despite them.
You know, back before I switched over my ssh servers to nonstandard ports, I'd see daily attempts to log in as 'guest' or 'admin' as well as a dictionary of common usernames. People wouldn't try if it didn't work occasionally.
Back in the good old days, spies couldn't sit on their couches in their PJs watching soap operas while their scripts downloaded stuff in the background. They actually had to go out to do their jobs.
Slashdot Mirror
Indeed. Many (some?) places worth their salt will pay their top people to go get their PhDs while avoiding the grad student slave wage.
I'd like to think this is part of a clever American plan for world domination by convincing the rest of the planet that force fields and intelligent robots and starships are real through decades of pushing science fiction and fantasy movies, books, and television shows, thereby turning the rest of the planet into gullible saps. I really would like to think that. Unfortunately, it seems some of us are starting to believe our own propaganda here, so I'm not sure.
and why do I care?
I'm sure that no one will blab anything of interest to an adversary government.
Jesus, come on guys. How many "anonymous users" have posted an Ask Slashdot about some arcane details about US cyber security in the past 20 years? Think before you flap your lips, eh?
Well, if you leave out the part about where, actually they really were armed, or were high as a kite, or had just held up a convenience store and were trying to get away, or started the fights that led to their deaths in the first place, or were waving around a (very real looking toy) gun in a public park and had had the police called on them, or any combination of the above, then sure, yeah, I could see how you think Kaepernick is on target.
But yeah, if you ignore all that context, and ignore all the "unarmed" white people who get themselves killed by similar methods, then sure, why not?
Okay snowflake, let me clue you in to how freedom works. Kaepernick and co are perfectly free to give a big fat middle finger to the flag at every opportunity. And everyone else is free to give them a big fat middle finger right back and to point out that their protest is predicated on, at best, questionable facts. To put it politely.
In China and places like it, you say something nasty about the government, you get jailed.
See the distinction?
Has been since new ownership. All click-bait headlines and not an ounce of adult vocabulary or even basic copy-editing to catch grammar or spelling errors.
Sometimes just copy-and-pasted headlines from other click-bait factories. Shame really. Comments section still has good people and you occasionally learn something. But the whining kids have increased in number. Probably baited by the clickbait headlines. C'est la vie.
See above https://slashdot.org/comments....
What's so difficult to understand about "I need an experienced person with experience in the problem domain I'm hiring him for, so I will not consider people whose only qualification is being bright-eyed and bushy-tailed and having racked up exactly zero real-world experience" that you feel the need to jump down my throat? Is it because you have no real-world experience and expect job offers to jump down your pants by virtue of having a piece of paper from a highfallutin university and nothing else?
I've seen plenty of kids start work. I've been one myself. I'm pretty freakin smart if I do say so myself but I remember that it took me a good four or five years before I became useful. Not because I didn't know what I was doing (though there is that...there's a ton of technical stuff they don't teach in school) but because I hadn't had the experience of working in teams with and for other people. I've seen that pattern repeated to five decimal places with every kid that got hired on after me. Some positions are entry-level. This one wasn't.
If the McLarens exploded and killed the officer every other day, that would be bad branding.
Moment of inertia goes like size squared. So your 5" mini will be much more agile than the 5 ft whatever in the video. That means it canhave that tight PID loop because the rotational equivalent of the thrust-to-weight ratio (ie torque to moment) is so much higher for the smaller vehicle. Like I said above, the sweetspot for manned vehicles favors larger, because what you lose in control authority you make up for in not needing it since you're so big and apt to stay put in the presence of disturbance. For unmanned, you can and should go small. Ain't nothin' more agile than a hummingbird.
Helicopter rotors aren't rigid to the body of the vehicle, there's a little flexibility built into it. That's so that the big spinning gyroscope that is the rotor can keep its orientation. That's why it is more correct to think of it as hanging from its rotor. The quadcoptor rotors are rigid and tilt with the vehicle. It's more like a rocket, like another poster below has said.
That's only for aerofoils in forward flight. Above/below makes much less of a difference in slow hover with fixed orientation propellers.
It's a stretch to say you'd've "just graduated" in the same way that a kid with college and less than two years of experience on his resume "just graduated."
This thing sucks. With the guy sitting up above the plane of the rotor (or hanging down below), the moment of inertia is about as high as it gets, meaning the control authority of the rotors is lower. At the same time, sitting up that high, the lever arm for the aerodynamic force from wind disturbances catching the rider are maximized. Side-to-side the baseline between the rotors is lower than front-to-back. That's why you see him wobble side-to-side when he flew down the parking lot.
These statements generally hold true for all aircraft, which is why larger aircraft are "safer" from a wind gust perspective than smaller aircraft. So what we've got here is something that's pretty bad from a stability perspective being pitched for an application where agility is necessary and the wind gust environment around them skyscrapers in the desert is potentially quite severe.
More money than brains.
Of course I can. I put out a req for ten years experience and I got back a resume that says just finished college. Why am I going to waste my time on a kid when I need a someone with a track record?
RTFA. The incentives may be the same (in kind, if not in degree), but here there are strong disincentives from faking shit that don't exist over there.
Good for them. They can have all the fun in the world with my collection of used ice scrapers, windex, and paper towels.
That's why I have a brake pedal lock that I use religiously on my ten year old Chevy and my wife's brand new VW. Yeah you can get into the car, but you can't drive off with it. The VW has a fatter brake pedal lever than my Chevy, so the lock doesn't fit as well, but it's still more work for a thief that I'd rather be there than not.
We needed to hire another coder a few years back. One of our greybeards said, "don't just look at resumes and gauge the firmness of their handshakes, make them take a coding test." So I wrote one up that specifically tested the skills we needed the new pair of hands for that fit onto six pages of good old-fashioned paper.
We got six bites for the position through our usual staffing firms. Three were kids barely old enough to go drinking with, so they're out because we needed someone to work, not to be taught to work, and three guys with about a decade plus. All three had impeccable resumes.
The first guy could barely figure out which way was up on the pages I gave him. The second figured out which side of the page was up but promptly got more than half the questions wrong. The last one promptly got slightly less than half the questions wrong. That's the guy we went with, and we lucked out because he learned quickly and has done good work for us.
The first guy, in the process of revealing to us that he couldn't tell C++ from a hole in the ground also came up with this gem among his many grumblings: "This code test is awful! You could get someone at way less than my rate to come up with it!"
The moral of this story: we've all interviewed Guy Number 1 at some point in our careers. Complaints about other people ruining your work and not being able to provide code samples because whateverwhatever will set off alarm bells. You need to prove you can code by yourself. If that means something as simple as maintaining a personal webpage where you just experiment with stuff, do it. If that means contributing to OSS, do it. If that means offering to take any and all code tests during an interview, do it. But what you don't want to do is start the interview with whining and complaining. Even if you're right, you'll be lumped in with all the jackasses that are all bluster and no technical competence and you won't even make it to the interview.
will replace computer keyboards. Makes about as much sense as every other "disruption" prediction.
Then there's the fact that the more protocols and policies you have, the fewer of them are actually going to be implemented. Good security is just the right amount. Not so little that your passwords are left on default, no so much that no one gets around to changing the default passwords because they're busy checking all the other boxes and figuring out ways to get their work done despite them.
You know, back before I switched over my ssh servers to nonstandard ports, I'd see daily attempts to log in as 'guest' or 'admin' as well as a dictionary of common usernames. People wouldn't try if it didn't work occasionally.
Please, do post for all to see.
Back in the good old days, spies couldn't sit on their couches in their PJs watching soap operas while their scripts downloaded stuff in the background. They actually had to go out to do their jobs.
Computers make everyone stupid.