Why do you speak of his own personal profit? He already has luxury jet, a luxury penthouse, and all the money he can eat. And now he'll be slumming it at the White House, flying in less comfort, and working for about a buck a year.
I just don't see financial profit as a driver for ANY president that I can think of.
The Carrera was a race car that was made street legal.
To clarify: the Carrera was designed to race in a class which required that the car be available in a 'street legal' form - but it was intended solely for the track.
There are plenty of other high horsepower cars that handle much better from companies like McLaren or Koenigsegg. Hell Koenigsegg even has a video showing how you can swerve the wheel at speed and not spin out.
This raises an interesting question: What is 'good' handling? Is it handling that you can readily recover from, or is it maximum performance? I'm thinking of the early 911s - wickedly fast in the right hands, but the trailing throttle over-steer could send even a good driver off a corner backwards.
Back in my high school days, LotR was in full popularity and I learned Tengwar well enough to take notes in Psychology class. I also used it to write the lyrics from "Days of Future Past" on one end of the stage lighting panel. I often wonder what future classes thought of it . . .
How many iPads are stolen daily and I can assure you apple doesn't give two shits if you get it back they won't look over their internal GPS logs that you know they have to get yours back but when it's Job's well you can see the difference.
I think the previous poster was right on the money, I think you're the one missing the point.
From the linked article:
"he stole two iMacs, three iPads, three iPods, one Apple TV, a diamond necklace and earrings, and several other items."
I'm not surprised that a theft of that magnitude gets more attention than the loss of a single device. Regardless of who the victim was.
No need for the vendor; just look for the holographic Windows sticker which includes the product key (as well as version info). MS requires having the sticker on systems sold with Windows. It is often on the back of desktops, or on the bottom of laptops, or in the battery well.
This is true for most GA airports. But LAX also services commercial airplanes, so anyone on the air side of the airport will have to have gone through security screening.
Otherwise it's a Very Big Security Hole at LAX. Because you can always just use the GA terminal to get full access to the airfield and the restricted parts of the airport. (It's all connected to the same runways and all that, and if you're willing to walk a bit, you can end up at the regular terminal as well. Or just take one of the many carts).
So no, commercial airports will demand their GA terminal have standard security screenings. Regular GA-only airports usually don't have much more than a security door, and most cases the FBO will just have two doors - one from the outside into the FBO, one from the FBO to the field.
But your theory has a Very Big Security Hole: I can fly my private plane into LAX from an unsecured GA airport and I'd have "full access to the airfield and the restricted parts of the airport." As you point out, they're all connected by runways and taxiways.
I suspect that the cross-access restrictions for mixed use airports are stricter than you think they are.
Slashdot Mirror
The Dragon is re-usable; they're only renting it. Let the owner worry about warranties.
Uh . . . no.
Not at all.
Sorry, but it's an American company (led by an immigrant) that is doing it.
Why do you speak of his own personal profit? He already has luxury jet, a luxury penthouse, and all the money he can eat. And now he'll be slumming it at the White House, flying in less comfort, and working for about a buck a year.
I just don't see financial profit as a driver for ANY president that I can think of.
"To the moon, Alice! To the moon!"
Yes; he looses technology into the world.
These issues cannot be hand-waived away by an internet know-it-all.
Please tell me that that was deliberate, 'cuz I love it.
Well put.
Put it in FAA aircraft crash reporting terms:
Cause of accident: Driver failed to maintain control of vehicle.
Contributing factors: Ages tires.
Yes, the driver is ultimately responsible, but identifying the weak link in the accident chain is of some value.
[This is especially true if you're interested more in cause than blame.]
The Carrera was a race car that was made street legal.
To clarify: the Carrera was designed to race in a class which required that the car be available in a 'street legal' form - but it was intended solely for the track.
There are plenty of other high horsepower cars that handle much better from companies like McLaren or Koenigsegg. Hell Koenigsegg even has a video showing how you can swerve the wheel at speed and not spin out.
This raises an interesting question: What is 'good' handling? Is it handling that you can readily recover from, or is it maximum performance? I'm thinking of the early 911s - wickedly fast in the right hands, but the trailing throttle over-steer could send even a good driver off a corner backwards.
Hey, I'm a sexist pig - you insensitive clod.
Back in my high school days, LotR was in full popularity and I learned Tengwar well enough to take notes in Psychology class. I also used it to write the lyrics from "Days of Future Past" on one end of the stage lighting panel. I often wonder what future classes thought of it . . .
I haven't been in the market for decades, but I can recall when direct drive was replacing belt drive on high end, home turntables. Did things change?
I mean what is their incentive to help.
For example:
http://www.computerworld.com/article/2505972/government-it/how-police-tracked-down-steve-jobs--stolen-ipads.html
How many iPads are stolen daily and I can assure you apple doesn't give two shits if you get it back they won't look over their internal GPS logs that you know they have to get yours back but when it's Job's well you can see the difference.
I think the previous poster was right on the money, I think you're the one missing the point.
From the linked article:
"he stole two iMacs, three iPads, three iPods, one Apple TV, a diamond necklace and earrings, and several other items."
I'm not surprised that a theft of that magnitude gets more attention than the loss of a single device. Regardless of who the victim was.
No need for the vendor; just look for the holographic Windows sticker which includes the product key (as well as version info). MS requires having the sticker on systems sold with Windows. It is often on the back of desktops, or on the bottom of laptops, or in the battery well.
It's tunnels, all the way down.
Is there a Balrog in the woodpile?
It's a lot easier to tunnel if you do it while the ground is still shaking.
This is true for most GA airports. But LAX also services commercial airplanes, so anyone on the air side of the airport will have to have gone through security screening.
Otherwise it's a Very Big Security Hole at LAX. Because you can always just use the GA terminal to get full access to the airfield and the restricted parts of the airport. (It's all connected to the same runways and all that, and if you're willing to walk a bit, you can end up at the regular terminal as well. Or just take one of the many carts).
So no, commercial airports will demand their GA terminal have standard security screenings. Regular GA-only airports usually don't have much more than a security door, and most cases the FBO will just have two doors - one from the outside into the FBO, one from the FBO to the field.
But your theory has a Very Big Security Hole: I can fly my private plane into LAX from an unsecured GA airport and I'd have "full access to the airfield and the restricted parts of the airport." As you point out, they're all connected by runways and taxiways.
I suspect that the cross-access restrictions for mixed use airports are stricter than you think they are.
That explains why it was on the wrong side of the road.
Without all the welfare given to musk, it would have been cheaper to launch with the Russians.
Which means that with the welfare given to Musk, it is cheaper to launch without the Russians.
Works for me.
Sounds like someone burned his fingers on a common kitchen appliance . . .
I'm genuinely surprised they managed to find a worse name than Verizon.
Maybe GTE?
I got a bit nickel shortly after they dropped the drop size. Still have it, worth about $50 now . . . one of my better investments.
And here's Harmy's version (which I have): http://originaltrilogy.com/top...