And, we're going to have to explain things before the hoplophobes even begin to understand what you just said.
The REASON the founding fathers were so careful to enshrine the right to keep and bear arms for the PEOPLE, is so that we can defend ourselves from our GOVERNMENT!
Not exactly - but killing a person who murders helpless babies should be rewarded, and not punished.
It amazes me that the African-Americans haven't caught on yet. Millions of young black lives destroyed at black-hating clinics around the nation, and the NAACP just acts like nothing has happened.
Reasoning ability? Who needs that? I'm just so very grateful that we have the fine intelligence apparatus that stopped the alleged Boston bombers before they killed anyone. And, they stopped those murderous swine in San Bernardino before they killed anyone.
Oh - wait. I must have inserted my head into my anus for a moment - Homeland Insecurity hasn't caught a terrorist to this day.
We're fucked, people. Well and truly fucked.
How's that for reasoning, Micky? Do I get a passing grade?
So, let me get this straight. Because you fear, I should be restricted.
You fear terrorists, so I must not visit a terrorist web site. You fear bombs, so I must not know how to make a bomb. You fear guns, so I must not own a gun.
What I understand is, you are a fascist, who has decided that you must dictate how I live my life, to assuage your baseless fears.
I can complain. And, I have stopped using their prototype products. The only use I have for Windows, is in virtual machines, for experimentation. And, I can still complain about unethical bullshit. It's my computer, my bandwidth, my data. The hardware store that sold me hammers, shovels, saws, etc doesn't have some right to follow me around to see how I use those tools. Microsoft has no right either.
Yes, it was used extensively in wooden sailing ships. That was a different world, and ships had entirely different designs, and reacted to physics differently than today's ships.
First, wooden sailing ships all have deep keels. A lot of the weight above the waterline was counterweighted by that keel. That is, a lot more weight than just the mast and sails, all of which were high above the main deck, adding to the tendency to roll over.
Also - virtually all of the material used to build the ship was lighter than water. Not so today.
I can only refer you once more to the study of the tumblehome's righting arms. A lot of experts have agreed that the tumblehome doesn't have inherent stability of an Arleigh Burke, or an Adams, or any of dozens of other steel, iron, or aluminum hulled ships.
Conventional hulls acquire greater and greater righting arms, the further they roll. Tumblehome starts losing that righting momentum around 50%, and it falls off yet a little more with every degree of roll.
I can tell you that I would desert if I were sent to the North Atlantic in the winter time aboard a tumblehome ship. I missed the "perfect storm", but we survived a couple other storms that were deadly. If you find yourself out on those waters on an unstable vessel, about all you can do is put your head between your knees, and kiss your ass goodbuy.
Well, Mr. Smartypants - click my second link. Current research says nothing HAS changed. Righting arms. What is that, you ask? Well - what it means is, a Zumwalt putting to sea from Hampton Roads will have hell just GETTING TO SEA. Zumwalts can't cruise the Arctic circle in the winter months. In fact, they can't cruise the central Atlantic in hurricane season. Tumblehome is inherently unstable in heavy seas. It doesn't matter how much technology has changed, a high center of mass remains a high center of mass.
Now, when the bright boys invent anti-gravity, a high center of mass may not mean anything. Until then, Zumwalt is a death trap.
Read, and learn. There is a career available for you in marine architecture, if you can grasp basic physics.
This "futuristic" hull design isn't anything new. The French did this already, long ago. They sold a small fleet of these "rollover" design ships to Russia. And, Russia lost the only engagement in which they participated to Japan. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
The Arleigh Burke class has 1.5 times the righting arm that the Zumwalt does, up to about 50 degrees. From 50 to 90 degrees, the Burke has three times the righting arms. Right around 95 degrees of roll, the Zumwalt stops trying to right itself, and capsizes. The Burke continues to right itself all the way to 110 degrees - that is, when the ship is lying on it's side, with the mast underwater, it can still roll itself back upright. http://www.phisicalpsience.com...
Long story short - the Zumwalt is a fair weather sailor, and it won't be worth a shit in the real world.
Generic PC's are perfectly suitable for running Linux and BSD. Basically, same price as the Windows PC's commonly available on the market, minus the Microsoft tax.
AC has often lied to us - but, if this is true, I love it!
"I have students every day saying they want macs and even a few who are big fans of linux."
Push them, man. Teach them some critical thinking. Get all of your students to question authority. WTF has happened to us? We, as a nation, have just come to accept corporate brain washing?
"Shedding legacy" if fine. If that were all there were to it, MS could offer Win7 users an OPTIONAL update, which turns off various legacy functions that have exploits associated with them.
That is not the case here. MS is pushing their telemetry. In effect, they want your machine to become a part of their cloud. That is unacceptable.
By the time a case makes it to court, the damage is done. Your computer is "upgraded", Windows telemetry knows everything that is on your machine, and all your secrets are public. Not to mention, that half of your software no longer works, because of compatibility issues.
It gets harder and harder for me to understand why so many people stay on Microsoft operating systems.
You sir, have summarized an awful lot of space-warfare understanding in a few sentences.
A lot of quite intelligent writers have said much the same thing. War in space will be terribly, terribly expensive. Low tech will often trump high tech, just because there is so damned much low tech available, and it's easy to use.
We see some of that right here on earth. We spend zillions of dollars on surveillance, but a handful of low-tech jihadists pulled off a fairly successful terror attack in Paris, using mostly just weapons available a hundred years ago.
Jesus H. Christ. I posted in my original post - OP understood what he was talking about, I understood what he was talking about, but OP didn't state it as clearly as he might have. I stated the almost-obvious for the sake of idiots who would come along and not see the obvious.
And - you're not seeing the obvious.
But, thanks for playing. You don't win the internets today.
Mmm-hmmm. It seems that you meant to explain something, but simply failed to enunciate it fully. Don't get butthurt because I added the phrase that you neglected to type into your narrative. It's pretty obvious that you and I both understand what you were saying, but even among rather well educated people, some don't.
Sister in law had a Satellite Sebring. Can't remember the year now. It was fairly badass, but she got much better gas mileage than you're claiming. 12 - 15 mpg I guess. It wasn't as good as my Nova on fuel mileage, but it was a damned nice car.
Re:The real worry should be Kessler Syndrome
on
Satellite Wars (ft.com)
·
· Score: 4, Informative
"bullets lose energy quickly with distance" IN AN ATMOSPHERE. In a perfect vacuum, a bullet is going to retain just as much of it's initial energy as your buckets of sand will - pretty much all of it, for a long long time. And, like your particles of sand, the bullets will stay in orbit long enough to make a number of near misses, before finally hitting the target, or falling into the atmosphere.
No different than aviation. Aircraft are relatively easy to track and target. Opposing forces might tolerate each other's aircraft, until one side or the other decides that he is at greater risk because of the aircraft. So, he swats them out of the sky.
Satellites will be no different. Whoever calculates that he gains the most by killing satellites is going to kill them.
War crime? Maybe - but if I'm still alive next year, or next decade, to stand trial, then I've won. If I'm NOT still alive the - well, who really gives a shit then?
I've kept ledgers. Money in, money out. Accounts receivable, etc ad nauseum.
If PP receives cash in return for body parts, then they've sold body parts. That is the bottom line.
That's like they claim that no federal tax dollars are spent on abortions. Utter bullshit - a huge part of their income comes from taxes. Without the taxes, they couldn't keep their doors open. Keeping their doors open enables them to perform abortions. Bottom line - tax dollars enable PP to perform abortions, despite what their imaginative accountants claim.
It is you who is being disengenuous. We see advertisements on Ebay for items worth - ohhh - fifty bucks. They are advertised for some ridiculous price like $1, plus $100 shipping. The vendor who offered that fifty dollar item gets real close to 100% markup. Are we going to argue that he didn't "sell" the item at a profit?
GP makes a valid point. DIshonest people play with words to make their dishonesty look honest.
Slashdot Mirror
Touche'
And, we're going to have to explain things before the hoplophobes even begin to understand what you just said.
The REASON the founding fathers were so careful to enshrine the right to keep and bear arms for the PEOPLE, is so that we can defend ourselves from our GOVERNMENT!
Not exactly - but killing a person who murders helpless babies should be rewarded, and not punished.
It amazes me that the African-Americans haven't caught on yet. Millions of young black lives destroyed at black-hating clinics around the nation, and the NAACP just acts like nothing has happened.
Reasoning ability? Who needs that? I'm just so very grateful that we have the fine intelligence apparatus that stopped the alleged Boston bombers before they killed anyone. And, they stopped those murderous swine in San Bernardino before they killed anyone.
Oh - wait. I must have inserted my head into my anus for a moment - Homeland Insecurity hasn't caught a terrorist to this day.
We're fucked, people. Well and truly fucked.
How's that for reasoning, Micky? Do I get a passing grade?
Don't worry, it's not in Gate's basement, it's in Gore's garage. That's why I've double-ROT-13'd this message, so the terrorists can't read it.
So, let me get this straight. Because you fear, I should be restricted.
You fear terrorists, so I must not visit a terrorist web site.
You fear bombs, so I must not know how to make a bomb.
You fear guns, so I must not own a gun.
What I understand is, you are a fascist, who has decided that you must dictate how I live my life, to assuage your baseless fears.
I can complain. And, I have stopped using their prototype products. The only use I have for Windows, is in virtual machines, for experimentation. And, I can still complain about unethical bullshit. It's my computer, my bandwidth, my data. The hardware store that sold me hammers, shovels, saws, etc doesn't have some right to follow me around to see how I use those tools. Microsoft has no right either.
Yes, it was used extensively in wooden sailing ships. That was a different world, and ships had entirely different designs, and reacted to physics differently than today's ships.
First, wooden sailing ships all have deep keels. A lot of the weight above the waterline was counterweighted by that keel. That is, a lot more weight than just the mast and sails, all of which were high above the main deck, adding to the tendency to roll over.
Also - virtually all of the material used to build the ship was lighter than water. Not so today.
I can only refer you once more to the study of the tumblehome's righting arms. A lot of experts have agreed that the tumblehome doesn't have inherent stability of an Arleigh Burke, or an Adams, or any of dozens of other steel, iron, or aluminum hulled ships.
Conventional hulls acquire greater and greater righting arms, the further they roll. Tumblehome starts losing that righting momentum around 50%, and it falls off yet a little more with every degree of roll.
I can tell you that I would desert if I were sent to the North Atlantic in the winter time aboard a tumblehome ship. I missed the "perfect storm", but we survived a couple other storms that were deadly. If you find yourself out on those waters on an unstable vessel, about all you can do is put your head between your knees, and kiss your ass goodbuy.
Well, Mr. Smartypants - click my second link. Current research says nothing HAS changed. Righting arms. What is that, you ask? Well - what it means is, a Zumwalt putting to sea from Hampton Roads will have hell just GETTING TO SEA. Zumwalts can't cruise the Arctic circle in the winter months. In fact, they can't cruise the central Atlantic in hurricane season. Tumblehome is inherently unstable in heavy seas. It doesn't matter how much technology has changed, a high center of mass remains a high center of mass.
Now, when the bright boys invent anti-gravity, a high center of mass may not mean anything. Until then, Zumwalt is a death trap.
Read, and learn. There is a career available for you in marine architecture, if you can grasp basic physics.
This "futuristic" hull design isn't anything new. The French did this already, long ago. They sold a small fleet of these "rollover" design ships to Russia. And, Russia lost the only engagement in which they participated to Japan.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
The Arleigh Burke class has 1.5 times the righting arm that the Zumwalt does, up to about 50 degrees. From 50 to 90 degrees, the Burke has three times the righting arms. Right around 95 degrees of roll, the Zumwalt stops trying to right itself, and capsizes. The Burke continues to right itself all the way to 110 degrees - that is, when the ship is lying on it's side, with the mast underwater, it can still roll itself back upright.
http://www.phisicalpsience.com...
Long story short - the Zumwalt is a fair weather sailor, and it won't be worth a shit in the real world.
Generic PC's are perfectly suitable for running Linux and BSD. Basically, same price as the Windows PC's commonly available on the market, minus the Microsoft tax.
AC has often lied to us - but, if this is true, I love it!
"I have students every day saying they want macs and even a few who are big fans of linux."
Push them, man. Teach them some critical thinking. Get all of your students to question authority. WTF has happened to us? We, as a nation, have just come to accept corporate brain washing?
PUSH THEM!
"Shedding legacy" if fine. If that were all there were to it, MS could offer Win7 users an OPTIONAL update, which turns off various legacy functions that have exploits associated with them.
That is not the case here. MS is pushing their telemetry. In effect, they want your machine to become a part of their cloud. That is unacceptable.
By the time a case makes it to court, the damage is done. Your computer is "upgraded", Windows telemetry knows everything that is on your machine, and all your secrets are public. Not to mention, that half of your software no longer works, because of compatibility issues.
It gets harder and harder for me to understand why so many people stay on Microsoft operating systems.
Grow up . . . . FFS
You sir, have summarized an awful lot of space-warfare understanding in a few sentences.
A lot of quite intelligent writers have said much the same thing. War in space will be terribly, terribly expensive. Low tech will often trump high tech, just because there is so damned much low tech available, and it's easy to use.
We see some of that right here on earth. We spend zillions of dollars on surveillance, but a handful of low-tech jihadists pulled off a fairly successful terror attack in Paris, using mostly just weapons available a hundred years ago.
It was a plain and simple meeting when we met. I was plain, and you were simple. Run along now, go watch the dust floating in the sunbeam.
Jesus H. Christ. I posted in my original post - OP understood what he was talking about, I understood what he was talking about, but OP didn't state it as clearly as he might have. I stated the almost-obvious for the sake of idiots who would come along and not see the obvious.
And - you're not seeing the obvious.
But, thanks for playing. You don't win the internets today.
And, the butthurt goes on . . .
Mmm-hmmm. It seems that you meant to explain something, but simply failed to enunciate it fully. Don't get butthurt because I added the phrase that you neglected to type into your narrative. It's pretty obvious that you and I both understand what you were saying, but even among rather well educated people, some don't.
Sister in law had a Satellite Sebring. Can't remember the year now. It was fairly badass, but she got much better gas mileage than you're claiming. 12 - 15 mpg I guess. It wasn't as good as my Nova on fuel mileage, but it was a damned nice car.
"bullets lose energy quickly with distance" IN AN ATMOSPHERE. In a perfect vacuum, a bullet is going to retain just as much of it's initial energy as your buckets of sand will - pretty much all of it, for a long long time. And, like your particles of sand, the bullets will stay in orbit long enough to make a number of near misses, before finally hitting the target, or falling into the atmosphere.
No different than aviation. Aircraft are relatively easy to track and target. Opposing forces might tolerate each other's aircraft, until one side or the other decides that he is at greater risk because of the aircraft. So, he swats them out of the sky.
Satellites will be no different. Whoever calculates that he gains the most by killing satellites is going to kill them.
War crime? Maybe - but if I'm still alive next year, or next decade, to stand trial, then I've won. If I'm NOT still alive the - well, who really gives a shit then?
Easier to accept that the CIA director and various other top government officials should be hanged.
I've kept ledgers. Money in, money out. Accounts receivable, etc ad nauseum.
If PP receives cash in return for body parts, then they've sold body parts. That is the bottom line.
That's like they claim that no federal tax dollars are spent on abortions. Utter bullshit - a huge part of their income comes from taxes. Without the taxes, they couldn't keep their doors open. Keeping their doors open enables them to perform abortions. Bottom line - tax dollars enable PP to perform abortions, despite what their imaginative accountants claim.
It is you who is being disengenuous. We see advertisements on Ebay for items worth - ohhh - fifty bucks. They are advertised for some ridiculous price like $1, plus $100 shipping. The vendor who offered that fifty dollar item gets real close to 100% markup. Are we going to argue that he didn't "sell" the item at a profit?
GP makes a valid point. DIshonest people play with words to make their dishonesty look honest.