The USAF did a study on the subject called Project Thor. They used tungsten rods and came to the conclusion that it was roughly equivalent to using plain TNT. The only remaining advantage is this system can be deployed extremely fast and is almost impossible to stop once launched. That ignores the energy needed to get the rods into orbit. Once you got a presence on the moon... that is a different story... Just lob some rocks at the earth if they don't do your bidding.
The novel thing with this research is that a layman can "program" the robot... a little like you would instruct a child. The TFA focused on the knife, but some references are made to balancing a coffee cup or similar. To bad the summary and article focus so much on the knife bit.
Did you mean French defeats? -- sorry I just had to say it.
But yes, not only would it be terribly difficult to put up with one (probably more than one because of EU defensive pacts) relativly well militarized nation. This would add to the fact that it would also be economic suicide.
Flight crews, that is pilots and flight attendants do that, except on one plane. I know for example that Lufthansa (use to?) operates a plane that did Frakfurt, Paris, Munich, Fankfurt (or something like that). I get the idea that the device is bound to the pilot, it creates a certain respect for the device, since if it breaks, it is your device that breaks not any random one.
On the other hand I don't get the personal use aspect. What is so bad about restricting the device to professional related matters only. It is not like a doctor is told he can use the X-Ray machine in the off hours...
The possession as single ground for prosecution is a dangerous can of worms. Originally with VCR tapes and paper pictures this law made some sense, but now you can embed a 0x0 sized picture into a website and boom instant dissident conviction machine. Although I don't know about the details of this case, this sounds somewhat similar... Oh, you leaked some secret documents, ey?
Pure age is not the wisest. For example "The Mythical Man-Month" is still relevant as it was 1975 or "Refactoring: Improving the Design of Existing Code" as of 1999. Certain things never change and that are the things that transcend specific technologies. You want to keep these. As GP said, specific technologies slowly die out and you should take his/her advice...
They would have not been stranded on the moon, they would have fired their return rockets. They where almost in perfect alignment for rendezvous with capsule in orbit. If you can get off the surface of the moon, it is not that big of a deal to get back into orbit from higher up. I am almost certain they trained for this situations, since technically anything could go wrong with the landing system.
If the return system had failed, that would be a different story.
Except that you need to overcome the gravity well of earth and (parts of) the sun. Here, I have an illustrative xkcd refecence: http://xkcd.com/681_large/.
You are comparing apples and oranges here. The speed in LEO is (mostly) constant. The (bits of) the ISS where once injected into orbit with significant energy and since then not much additional energy is needed to get the ISS going. (In LEO there is still some atmosphere and slows down the ISS and this is equalised occasionally.) But when you go to a different planet (or moon of), you need to thrust sufficiently to get earth escape velocity, which is significantly more than LEO. In addition, if you are going to the outer planets you need overcome the gravitational pull of the sun. (The inner planets you speed up by "falling" to the sun.)
Have you seen the rockets built for voyager? These where huge and it was for a small probe that was smaller than a compact car. Getting into space is hard and the rocket equation is a bitch.
Do you compile your programs from source and check that it is the last valid version from the project or do you install rpm or deb binary packages? Even if the actual project is vetted, it is near impossible to validate everything that comes though the automatic updates. This is definitely a point of failure, since you only need one person, the person that has access to the signing keys and the update server. So you trust canonical, red hat, SuSe to be fully vetted? Open source is better than closed source vendors, but in the end, if you download binaries you are in the mercy of the person who built them.
The UAV where operating, while the local government was in change, mostly while other aircraft where grounded because of bad weather. The result being that they did not impede anything.
The local government was able to coordinate with Falcon UAV. That is they where not operating rouge but working closely together with government until FEMA took over operations.
Apparently the Lyons Colorado "mission" would have taken 30 min. If you can spare 30 min for an accurate map of the situation, I think it may be worth iti; especially if you pick a time of bad weather where you can't do anything useful anyway. (Let them standby until notice... whatever) Unfortunately I am not there so I don't know.
True that, there is allot of military hardware that can help in a distaste, like trucks, transport helicopters and personnel. Many countries don't have the Army / National Guard split and routinely deploy military for rescue and relief operations. All it requires is a well formulated mandate to do so. It totally see not problem to deploy military grade UAVs (although unarmed) for reconnaissance missions in the case of a disaster. The only requirements is a proper formulated mandate. Oh and what do you thing the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is doing on a routine basis?
Fact 1: You are actively monitoring your food consumption. Do not underestimate the amount of energy you take up through snacks.
Fact 2: Although fat has a higher energy density than carbohydrates, normally you don't eat that much. For example you can easily eat 250g of bread (a hot dog bun), but eating 250g of butter (a stick of butter) plainly disgusting.
Fact 3: Most "high fat" diets are actually high on proteins, which have about the same energy density carbohydrates.
The reason why most high fat low carb diets work, are because you can still eat tasty food. Nothing kills you will do diet, than a month though with only salads and lightly cooked vegetables. Most, if not all diets, the "scientific" idea behind it are bogus and easily disproved. Yet they work because the actual energy intake is lower.
For example my wife does a "sleep slender" diet, which mandates no carbs for dinner. The idea is that it depletes the carbs in the blood stream while sleeping and thus fat gets burned. It turns out that this is complete and utter nonsense, yet it works. Simply because it reduces the portion, there is just so much meat and vegetables you can eat. In addition, if you follow the week plans they have, you will also just plainly eat less.
Except that people ("enemy combatants") are tortured for information. They are not accused of anything, they are just suspected to know something about someone else. In the past this did also happen to citizens and is a serious issue and should be addressed. This creates a serious loophole in the fifth amendment: "we are not chairing you of any crime, so tell us everything or else we put you behind bars"...
Although Joel Spolsky doesn't use the term Rock Star, he has AFAIK the best insight into the subject why "Rock Stars" (great developers) matter. He does not say all your organisation needs to be made up of outstanding tallent, but it helps to have some around.
Slashdot Mirror
How fitting, the current quote:
Do you guys know what you're doing, or are you just hacking?
+1 Insightful (No modpoints today...)
The USAF did a study on the subject called Project Thor. They used tungsten rods and came to the conclusion that it was roughly equivalent to using plain TNT. The only remaining advantage is this system can be deployed extremely fast and is almost impossible to stop once launched. That ignores the energy needed to get the rods into orbit. Once you got a presence on the moon... that is a different story... Just lob some rocks at the earth if they don't do your bidding.
Liquid fuel is actually not easily ignited (do not believe what you see in movies :-) ).
No, believe what the mythbusters do...
The novel thing with this research is that a layman can "program" the robot... a little like you would instruct a child. The TFA focused on the knife, but some references are made to balancing a coffee cup or similar. To bad the summary and article focus so much on the knife bit.
What?! I need it to cool my PC! You insensitive clod!
Got ten grand or twenty you can spare?
Did you mean French defeats? -- sorry I just had to say it.
But yes, not only would it be terribly difficult to put up with one (probably more than one because of EU defensive pacts) relativly well militarized nation. This would add to the fact that it would also be economic suicide.
Yes like the Toblerone Line. The Swiss really take their defense seriously... even more than the US and that means something.
Flight crews, that is pilots and flight attendants do that, except on one plane. I know for example that Lufthansa (use to?) operates a plane that did Frakfurt, Paris, Munich, Fankfurt (or something like that). I get the idea that the device is bound to the pilot, it creates a certain respect for the device, since if it breaks, it is your device that breaks not any random one.
On the other hand I don't get the personal use aspect. What is so bad about restricting the device to professional related matters only. It is not like a doctor is told he can use the X-Ray machine in the off hours...
Ah yes...
step one: install new game
step two: join random server
step three: get banned from server for "suspicious accuracy" after 5 min of play
Yes, fun things these newfangled shooters.
The possession as single ground for prosecution is a dangerous can of worms. Originally with VCR tapes and paper pictures this law made some sense, but now you can embed a 0x0 sized picture into a website and boom instant dissident conviction machine. Although I don't know about the details of this case, this sounds somewhat similar... Oh, you leaked some secret documents, ey?
+1 finally somebody said it (where are my mod points!!!!)
What is wrong with 720?
Remind me, in what war the US is currently engaged?
This!
Pure age is not the wisest. For example "The Mythical Man-Month" is still relevant as it was 1975 or "Refactoring: Improving the Design of Existing Code" as of 1999. Certain things never change and that are the things that transcend specific technologies. You want to keep these. As GP said, specific technologies slowly die out and you should take his/her advice...
They would have not been stranded on the moon, they would have fired their return rockets. They where almost in perfect alignment for rendezvous with capsule in orbit. If you can get off the surface of the moon, it is not that big of a deal to get back into orbit from higher up. I am almost certain they trained for this situations, since technically anything could go wrong with the landing system.
If the return system had failed, that would be a different story.
Except that you need to overcome the gravity well of earth and (parts of) the sun. Here, I have an illustrative xkcd refecence: http://xkcd.com/681_large/.
You are comparing apples and oranges here. The speed in LEO is (mostly) constant. The (bits of) the ISS where once injected into orbit with significant energy and since then not much additional energy is needed to get the ISS going. (In LEO there is still some atmosphere and slows down the ISS and this is equalised occasionally.) But when you go to a different planet (or moon of), you need to thrust sufficiently to get earth escape velocity, which is significantly more than LEO. In addition, if you are going to the outer planets you need overcome the gravitational pull of the sun. (The inner planets you speed up by "falling" to the sun.)
Have you seen the rockets built for voyager? These where huge and it was for a small probe that was smaller than a compact car. Getting into space is hard and the rocket equation is a bitch.
Do you compile your programs from source and check that it is the last valid version from the project or do you install rpm or deb binary packages? Even if the actual project is vetted, it is near impossible to validate everything that comes though the automatic updates. This is definitely a point of failure, since you only need one person, the person that has access to the signing keys and the update server. So you trust canonical, red hat, SuSe to be fully vetted? Open source is better than closed source vendors, but in the end, if you download binaries you are in the mercy of the person who built them.
assuming that they actually ran windows update ever...
It fully agree with your post except for:
The UAV where operating, while the local government was in change, mostly while other aircraft where grounded because of bad weather. The result being that they did not impede anything.
The local government was able to coordinate with Falcon UAV. That is they where not operating rouge but working closely together with government until FEMA took over operations.
Apparently the Lyons Colorado "mission" would have taken 30 min. If you can spare 30 min for an accurate map of the situation, I think it may be worth iti; especially if you pick a time of bad weather where you can't do anything useful anyway. (Let them standby until notice... whatever) Unfortunately I am not there so I don't know.
True that, there is allot of military hardware that can help in a distaste, like trucks, transport helicopters and personnel. Many countries don't have the Army / National Guard split and routinely deploy military for rescue and relief operations. All it requires is a well formulated mandate to do so. It totally see not problem to deploy military grade UAVs (although unarmed) for reconnaissance missions in the case of a disaster. The only requirements is a proper formulated mandate. Oh and what do you thing the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is doing on a routine basis?
Simply, because your energy intake is less.
Fact 1: You are actively monitoring your food consumption. Do not underestimate the amount of energy you take up through snacks.
Fact 2: Although fat has a higher energy density than carbohydrates, normally you don't eat that much. For example you can easily eat 250g of bread (a hot dog bun), but eating 250g of butter (a stick of butter) plainly disgusting.
Fact 3: Most "high fat" diets are actually high on proteins, which have about the same energy density carbohydrates.
The reason why most high fat low carb diets work, are because you can still eat tasty food. Nothing kills you will do diet, than a month though with only salads and lightly cooked vegetables. Most, if not all diets, the "scientific" idea behind it are bogus and easily disproved. Yet they work because the actual energy intake is lower.
For example my wife does a "sleep slender" diet, which mandates no carbs for dinner. The idea is that it depletes the carbs in the blood stream while sleeping and thus fat gets burned. It turns out that this is complete and utter nonsense, yet it works. Simply because it reduces the portion, there is just so much meat and vegetables you can eat. In addition, if you follow the week plans they have, you will also just plainly eat less.
Except that people ("enemy combatants") are tortured for information. They are not accused of anything, they are just suspected to know something about someone else. In the past this did also happen to citizens and is a serious issue and should be addressed. This creates a serious loophole in the fifth amendment: "we are not chairing you of any crime, so tell us everything or else we put you behind bars"...
Although Joel Spolsky doesn't use the term Rock Star, he has AFAIK the best insight into the subject why "Rock Stars" (great developers) matter. He does not say all your organisation needs to be made up of outstanding tallent, but it helps to have some around.