It flies at 300 knots and weighs ~30,000 lbs (~14,000 kg).
I worked on the NASA Global hawks for a few years. They are incredible aircraft and certainly not in the class of the toys it is being compared with. Predator comes close (I was on an effort to put a sensor on the NASA Predator but funding got yanked) but Predator doesn't have nearly the capability of Global Hawk.
That is not true of some of the older weapons. While it is highly unlikely that the weapon would explode at full yield, a fizzle of several hundreds or even kilo- tons was very possible.... definitely enough to take out a town or the flight line at the launching base. For instance there were weapons that would have a little chain of beryllium(?) wound up in the core that would be pulled out after launch - this was to prevent accidental detonation as there were no other safeguards on the weapon. Spark the right circuit and it would go off full power. The chain was very brittle - if it broke and left even a single link inside the pit the weapon was effectively bricked.
Gun type weapons are very susceptible to accidental detonation, even full yield detonation.
US weapons are all built with many safeguards these days (if you believe the unclassified literature). Foreign weapons... who knows.
I don't care how much steel and concrete is encasing the deadly poison. I am also similarly unimpressed with how clever the engineers who built the reactor think they are: I don't want that shit anywhere near me, and many people feel the same.
There is nothing unreasonable about this. Regardless of the reason, there will always be the possibility of a fuck up that breaches the containment.
They eliminate some code I"ll give you that. However you have no clue as to what the compiler is actually doing... and for that I click "Do Not Like." (Actually now I am going to disassemble some code to take a gander for myself.)
After developing C++ for so long - I indeed feel like an ape, I'll give you that. For the past few years I have been confined to C and assembly (various embedded projects) and I tell you it has been glorious.
Lambdas are indeed "tricks" that IMO are syntax candy (in C++), can be a bitch to debug, and add little value. But then again after 20 years of C+_ coding and inane debate (like this one) I feel this way about C++ in its entirety lately.
I don't feel this way about anonymous functions in general - I just think the C++ implementation is hopelessly bent.
No GPU powered database - just an H.264 codec, real time LIDAR data processor, and several GIS data processing modules.
GPGPU development (I use CUDA which makes it even easier) really isn't that hard. But then again I would expect a person with a high six digit user id to be challenged by the fundamentals.
Whew! I am relieved! For a second there I was under the impression that the price little guys pay for stock doesn't reflect these shenanigans. Thanks for clearing that up!
Slashdot Mirror
I am sure the OP meant 737.
It flies at 300 knots and weighs ~30,000 lbs (~14,000 kg).
I worked on the NASA Global hawks for a few years. They are incredible aircraft and certainly not in the class of the toys it is being compared with. Predator comes close (I was on an effort to put a sensor on the NASA Predator but funding got yanked) but Predator doesn't have nearly the capability of Global Hawk.
That is not true of some of the older weapons. While it is highly unlikely that the weapon would explode at full yield, a fizzle of several hundreds or even kilo- tons was very possible.... definitely enough to take out a town or the flight line at the launching base. For instance there were weapons that would have a little chain of beryllium(?) wound up in the core that would be pulled out after launch - this was to prevent accidental detonation as there were no other safeguards on the weapon. Spark the right circuit and it would go off full power. The chain was very brittle - if it broke and left even a single link inside the pit the weapon was effectively bricked.
Gun type weapons are very susceptible to accidental detonation, even full yield detonation.
US weapons are all built with many safeguards these days (if you believe the unclassified literature). Foreign weapons... who knows.
...and I wasn't the first one in. This one has tracks on it.
Life imitates art!
Default to masked, hit ctrl and it toggles to unmasked. Ctrl while unmasked makes it masked again.
Certainly it seems that the cerebellum would atrophy in such a virtual world since you would not move your appendages much (if at all).
Money "just appears" when a government mints it. You don't seem to have a problem with that.
Perhaps you don't... but perhaps if you could exchange your CPU time for (example) free shiping on Newegg then I bet your interest would increase.
I get access to, say, a paywalled site, for allowing their client X hours of CPU time a month. Or perhaps X GFLOPS per month.
Mexico is just getting us back for the All American Canal.
>> take their heads out of their asses.
I would say the same about the engineers behind Three Mile Island. And Chernobyl. And Fukushima...
I don't care how much steel and concrete is encasing the deadly poison. I am also similarly unimpressed with how clever the engineers who built the reactor think they are: I don't want that shit anywhere near me, and many people feel the same.
There is nothing unreasonable about this. Regardless of the reason, there will always be the possibility of a fuck up that breaches the containment.
and for chrissake turn your damn computer off.
I've been turning this one on and off for going on 5 years and it hasn't died or fried a drive yet.
While I don't think this warrants an explanation, "dirt" in this context is synonymous with "contaminant."
>> solves a host of messy structural issues.
They eliminate some code I"ll give you that. However you have no clue as to what the compiler is actually doing... and for that I click "Do Not Like." (Actually now I am going to disassemble some code to take a gander for myself.)
After developing C++ for so long - I indeed feel like an ape, I'll give you that. For the past few years I have been confined to C and assembly (various embedded projects) and I tell you it has been glorious.
...no reason not to be honest.
Lambdas are indeed "tricks" that IMO are syntax candy (in C++), can be a bitch to debug, and add little value. But then again after 20 years of C+_ coding and inane debate (like this one) I feel this way about C++ in its entirety lately.
I don't feel this way about anonymous functions in general - I just think the C++ implementation is hopelessly bent.
Seems like Palmdale would be a far better location.
Melissa Mayer's ability "summarized" in one word: Summly.
What else would you compare it with? The only living systems we know of are here.... and it would be humans running rampant.
No GPU powered database - just an H.264 codec, real time LIDAR data processor, and several GIS data processing modules.
GPGPU development (I use CUDA which makes it even easier) really isn't that hard. But then again I would expect a person with a high six digit user id to be challenged by the fundamentals.
Your spam reveals a lot more than you think.
Whew! I am relieved! For a second there I was under the impression that the price little guys pay for stock doesn't reflect these shenanigans. Thanks for clearing that up!
I guess we all have our strengths and weaknesses.