While I agree with the gist of this thread - I do think it's exciting to see some mainstream interest (and mainstream money) being put into consumer-grade 3d printers. Dell might not be the ideal company for it, but I still consider it another step toward having commodity 3d printers whose capabilities we can take for granted (just like our CD burners or laser printers).
You only need CATOBAR if you want strike capability. The ability to launch and recover large, heavy aircraft is very much for offense. If you're interested primarily in air defense, you can get by with lighter weight aircraft and much much lighter munitions. The Nimitz is great if you need to strike targets far from home, but if you have equally capable aircraft, you could defend against one with a far smaller carrier.
Doesn't make one or the other "proper," just built for different missions.
I hope they can focus the debate on what should be taught to children rather than the endless runaround a debate over creationism itself would be. I honestly think you could get a lot of value out of a debate over the merits of teaching some of the philosophy behind creationism.
We all know arguing creationism against science is like debating the merits of mustard over screwdrivers....
and those with a ruthless dedication to the pope, and those who put their left shoe on first (the heathens), and those who never learned the true meaning of zero, and those with stars upon thars, and those who have a potassium deficiency, and those who like parrots, and those who don't like parrots, and those who don't use a mouse mat, and lefties, and righties, and ambidextrousies, and those about to rock, and those named Spartacus, and those who can only count in hexadecimal, you insensitive clod.
Thanks for clarifying. Now I know if I'm involved in a high-speed chase, I should do it in my old Volvo. I'm pretty sure the cops on Segways couldn't keep up...
I can't stop reading that last sentence of yours... I mean, I'm no grammar expert, but I can't tell if it really needs any punctuation in it. Hell, I don't *want* it to have any punctuation in it!
Think long and hard about that Volvo. Do you want a car vulnerable to a very specific RF attack, or do you want one whose Lucas Electric system could fail at any second?
Those two don't matter much, the one that does in an older carb and points car is the ignition coil which generates the high voltage burst needed for the spark plug. Somebody better at electronics could tell us if you can disrupt an ignition coil before doing bad things to the driver... I'm guessing "yes." I'm also guessing that whatever device they've built is not powerful enough to do either.
Also, that's what's fun about "underpowered" cars. You can drive them close to their limits without getting too fast. 90% of the adrenaline rush with 10% of the danger of a supercar!
While the 944 is a fine car, there is a significant difference between it an a Carrera GT. You can't compare a fairly mass market daily driver and a street-legal race car. Even though there have been great gains in the last decade, traction control systems are inherently speed robbers. It wouldn't have made a damn lick of difference in this situation because the professional driver at the wheel would have turned it off as soon as he turned on the car.
Or more likely, C: You mis-timed the maneuver and careen into another car, lightpost, pedestrians at the crosswalk, etc because the only reason to lose traction from a stop like that is to show off. This is not a practical example. Save it for a closed course.
It doesn't make his point invalid. Traction control for a mass market car has very different requirements than those for a high performance car designed for track days. It takes a much more sophisticated system to be acceptable for a supercar like the Carrera GT, and I'd certainly argue that the systems simply weren't there yet in '04.
While generally true, they'll also keep the tires from skidding in a panic stop, and will give you a shorter stopping distance. How many people do you suppose actually practice threshold braking enough to be able to count on it when they really need it? I'd say for the average driver, they get control and shorter stopping distances.
Beat me to it... Drive your car at 10/10ths of its capability in an uncontrolled environment and you have no margin for error and nobody to blame but yourself. There are no cars built today that approach anywhere near their full capabilities when driven in normal traffic and as such require 100% flawless driving.
Slashdot Mirror
While I agree with the gist of this thread - I do think it's exciting to see some mainstream interest (and mainstream money) being put into consumer-grade 3d printers. Dell might not be the ideal company for it, but I still consider it another step toward having commodity 3d printers whose capabilities we can take for granted (just like our CD burners or laser printers).
You only need CATOBAR if you want strike capability. The ability to launch and recover large, heavy aircraft is very much for offense. If you're interested primarily in air defense, you can get by with lighter weight aircraft and much much lighter munitions. The Nimitz is great if you need to strike targets far from home, but if you have equally capable aircraft, you could defend against one with a far smaller carrier.
Doesn't make one or the other "proper," just built for different missions.
Everybody in the US knows what a kilo is... At least they aren't measuring it in stones...
Calm down man, it's less than 372 square meters!
What are you talking about? I just want to see what my tortoise and dog do all day when I'm at work!
I hope they can focus the debate on what should be taught to children rather than the endless runaround a debate over creationism itself would be. I honestly think you could get a lot of value out of a debate over the merits of teaching some of the philosophy behind creationism.
We all know arguing creationism against science is like debating the merits of mustard over screwdrivers....
To hell with the Viggen, bring back the 900!!!
and those with a ruthless dedication to the pope, and those who put their left shoe on first (the heathens), and those who never learned the true meaning of zero, and those with stars upon thars, and those who have a potassium deficiency, and those who like parrots, and those who don't like parrots, and those who don't use a mouse mat, and lefties, and righties, and ambidextrousies, and those about to rock, and those named Spartacus, and those who can only count in hexadecimal, you insensitive clod.
...math is hard
The More You Know!
Thanks for clarifying. Now I know if I'm involved in a high-speed chase, I should do it in my old Volvo. I'm pretty sure the cops on Segways couldn't keep up...
On the other hand, they did invent intermittent wipers and self-dimming headlights.....
...I giggled
I can't stop reading that last sentence of yours... I mean, I'm no grammar expert, but I can't tell if it really needs any punctuation in it. Hell, I don't *want* it to have any punctuation in it!
Oh I see... Why not just get a Camaro?
Think long and hard about that Volvo. Do you want a car vulnerable to a very specific RF attack, or do you want one whose Lucas Electric system could fail at any second?
~proud 1800 owner
Don't ruin his tin foil fantasy.
Those two don't matter much, the one that does in an older carb and points car is the ignition coil which generates the high voltage burst needed for the spark plug. Somebody better at electronics could tell us if you can disrupt an ignition coil before doing bad things to the driver... I'm guessing "yes." I'm also guessing that whatever device they've built is not powerful enough to do either.
OK, not sure what the mouse is... But for real, what is that AC's problem with 70s Datsuns? They had some great cars!
That's why I said "today" :)
Also, that's what's fun about "underpowered" cars. You can drive them close to their limits without getting too fast. 90% of the adrenaline rush with 10% of the danger of a supercar!
While the 944 is a fine car, there is a significant difference between it an a Carrera GT. You can't compare a fairly mass market daily driver and a street-legal race car. Even though there have been great gains in the last decade, traction control systems are inherently speed robbers. It wouldn't have made a damn lick of difference in this situation because the professional driver at the wheel would have turned it off as soon as he turned on the car.
Stop being rude about it.
Or more likely, C: You mis-timed the maneuver and careen into another car, lightpost, pedestrians at the crosswalk, etc because the only reason to lose traction from a stop like that is to show off. This is not a practical example. Save it for a closed course.
It doesn't make his point invalid. Traction control for a mass market car has very different requirements than those for a high performance car designed for track days. It takes a much more sophisticated system to be acceptable for a supercar like the Carrera GT, and I'd certainly argue that the systems simply weren't there yet in '04.
While generally true, they'll also keep the tires from skidding in a panic stop, and will give you a shorter stopping distance. How many people do you suppose actually practice threshold braking enough to be able to count on it when they really need it? I'd say for the average driver, they get control and shorter stopping distances.
You're not supposed to tune your carbs while riding your bike...
Hmm, I hadn't realized the car was an '04. Here I was thinking it was one of Porche's latest and greatest. Now this whole discussion feels stupid...
Beat me to it... Drive your car at 10/10ths of its capability in an uncontrolled environment and you have no margin for error and nobody to blame but yourself. There are no cars built today that approach anywhere near their full capabilities when driven in normal traffic and as such require 100% flawless driving.