And it's slow enough to be blown out of the sky by mobile AAA unit attached to field installations. About the only way it would have not to is to sit low and have someone else designate targets for it, like A-10s do now. Which would require fire control data providing support aircraft, which will be killed by fighters.
That depends. On one hand, the computer systems will be exceptionally complex. On the other hand cockpit and all life support systems can be eliminated, control systems can be decentralized and aircraft itself doesn't have to limit itself to human tolerance levels by design. You could build something like eurofighter that could actually push the limits of the air frame in terms of maneuverability.
So yes, in some terms it would be more complex (command and control computers). In others, it could be much less complex (command and control systems, life support). It's a bit of a mixed bag.
Country dependent. Here in Finland many fines are based on income, and are called päiväsakko (daily fine). The laws generally specify how many of these daily fines you pay. For example, you can get 30 daily fines for speeding.
The actual size of a fine is determined by your income based on taxation records. Our yellow press has some moments of fun when some famous hockey player gets caught speeding and ends up paying tens of thousands euroes for it.
Terabit connections are what ISPs doing those big 200meg "to each customer"-links want to use to link their switches and routers together and datacenters serving "full hd" content to millions of users want to use on their internal networks. That way, instead of having to running multiple switches over multiple cables, you could do with fewer switches/routers and cabling for the same or better performance.
At home, most machines can't properly utilize gigabit ethernet as of writing this due to internal bottlenecks of each machine. Vast majority of "integrated terabit" circutry you see advertised on motherboard packaging can barely push 300mbit on a good day. And few home users complain, because it's pretty much enough for anything home-based that you would need it for, and those few that need more will usually have pricy dedicated gear for it and methods for elimination of those internal bottlenecks.
In all the honesty, the problems are simply too big for a movement that small to address. It would probably require a massive consensus of most of the Western world to solve the conundrum of our current political and financial system (as they are currently essentially one system).
I'm not sure where you get your information, but level of sanity of your source is quite questionable. I'm not going to even bother talking about facts, of which your tirade is completely void.
First of all, majority of russians support Putin. There really is no question about this, not even in opposition camps. In fact, one of the main arguments in the opposition camps is that they need to "wake up the nation to oppose Putin". Because they're not opposing him now. Heck, even western election monitoring bodies agree on this part. They just disagree with how much of a majority support Putin commands in Russia.
As a result, Putin wouldn't have to "order an army to shoot down citizens". The anti-Putin mob would be counter mobbed by local youth groups and pro-Putin hardliners, of whom there's plenty. As has happened before.
In Syria, we have a fairly open civil war between different ethnic groups in a country where one ethnic minority has successfully oppressed all other groups for decades. To even think to compare this situation to Russia requires complete of ignorance of basic human interactions. I shudder to think what kind of environment one must live in to suffer from such illusions.
You conveniently forget the current costs for infrastructure needed to get hydrocarbons needed for transit extracted, refined and delivered world wide, which are likely at least an order of magnitude greater then simply putting more cables into the ground and erecting nuclear power plants.
Don't forget that we already have an extensive electric grid erected in most countries. It will certainly need an upgrade regardless of transportation going electric or not, as in most Western countries (European and Northern American countries, Japan and several others that had a massive grid building boom post WW2) it is long overdue for one and we're having trouble because our current grids are mostly very aged. So we might as well plan for vehicles going electric when we plan the infrastructure upgrades.
Thing is though, major infrastructure upgrades are not something that happens in a year, or even a decade. So they need to be planned decades ahead as well.
Anyone who runs cars on industrial levels, i.e. reasonably short trips with high usage times and long total travel times per day but with frequent stops wants these cars. Badly. Once infrastructure is in place, such operators are looking to save tens of percent, in many cases over half of running costs of their entire car fleets.
This includes, for example, delivery trucks, taxis, public transit and many other operators. Many operators in fact already use electric engines with or without batteries for such functions, such as busses that run off electric wires over the streets or electric trams. They even considered tricks like inductive chargers on bus stops in some places that will basically automatically charge a bus that stops over one, essentially eliminating fuelling needs of a bus, but again infrastructure build costs are simply too high in the current economy.
Other advantages of electric engines include far lower maintenance requirements due to sheer simplicity of engines, lack of exhaust fumes to pollute which is very relevant in modern large city centres and much better performance in heavy duty work.
Modern "mmo" gaming mice allow for essentially one hand gameplay in most modern games. You bind directional buttons to side buttons (or in care of rat mmo you just use the directional stick provided on the side of the mouse), as well as spread the buttons you need to control the game across the buttons available on the mouse.
It would take some time to get used to, but you should be able to play one handed without losing functionality like this.
The ONLY (let me emphasize this particular word) reason why carriers are still relevant is asymmetric nature of modern warfare. US, Russia, France, UK, China, Japan and several other countries with significant amount of modern weaponry cannot go to war with each other. If they did, life span of enemy carriers would be less then 24 hours. They're the first, and easiest targets to disable/kill as even relatively minor damage can cause too much tilt to make carrier operations impossible before significant repairs are made.
On the other hand, they excel at projecting power in asymmetric warfare, where opponent lacks modern anti-ship weaponry. For this reason, the countries with colonialist/imperialist intentions want them.
You're intentionally missing a forest for the trees. Just because citizens are represented by the state does not mean that state represents all of its citizens. Else, every time a citizen of US kills a citizen of another country, you could argue that it constitutes an act of war by your logic.
There are ways to fight local laws. It's called corruption outside of the Western countries and lobbying inside them.
Problem is that lobbying/corrupting in cultures very hostile to your idea is difficult. The stronger the innate resistance to your ideas, the more effort is needed, and at certain point, diminishing returns on effort simply become too great.
It's worth noting that there is a significant cultural difference at play here. What one culture considers "free speech", other may consider "defamation", "copyright infringement", "inciting of hatred" and many other things.
Consider for example the legislation in place in Germany against denying the Holocaust. Under "universal" free speech umbrella, I should be able to talk about Holocaust not having happened and it being a one big lie. Political and historical realities suggest that such free speech has potential to cause catastrophic damage, and as a result it's illegal in Germany, while legal in, for example, some Nordic countries.
To add to the mess is the current transition from centralised broadcast media to user-generated one. Much of the stuff comes from amateurs with meagre budgets, such as this movie and can be screened worldwide within minutes of being finished. This was an impossibility only a decade ago. We're in a new territory in terms of what is acceptable in different cultures, and as shown with this particular example, free speech can carry significant price paid in blood by those not even related to the speech in question.
There really are no easy solutions here. Internationalism is very difficult to make work because of cultural clashes like these. We simply have to take it one step at a time and hope and work for the best outcome.
And they are getting hit by it and hard. You can certainly test untested legislation, but you're ultimately responsible for results of such testing. In this particular case, the legislation has been tested before and Google was forced to comply. They don't want to step on the same rake again.
Funnies aside, not a good idea. High purity hydrogen makes many metal alloys brittle. Helium works so well because it's ideal gas that doesn't chemically react with almost anything.
Yes, I understand that you're a supremacist, completely unable to view the world outside your narrow lens what it "should be" as you have been taught.
Reality is, it's not chains, golden or not. It's a normal human society performing its base functions. Something that has apparently been so perverted in yours, that it rendered you apparently incapable of even understanding what the issue is, much less that there are functional and better alternatives to your very narrow view of "what should be right".
Because otherwise your friendly neighbourhood drug seller/tax evader could pretend to be doing good for the community and launder his money, as a result causing significant damage to people who actually do want to do good for the community, as well as the rest of the community.
Granted your "I won't listen to your dumb arguments you pinko commies" attitude shows that you don't care, and probably don't know that you don't have to "take up collection" for someone dying from cancer around here. He/she will be taken care of by the system, regardless of being able to afford it. It's the USA where you have to start begging people for money to get care when you're poor.
Whoever wrote this is either massively misinformed, or intentionally lying. It's very easy to simply form a ry (rekiströity yhdistys - registered organisation) and then apply for all necessary permits in this ry's name.
Seriously, this is taught here in 9th class of mandatory school. It's not rocket science. The person in question failed HARD at basics, and whoever wrote the article is basically whining "this country with different approach from mine is bad". Which as pointed above, is factually false just from looking at numbers.
I'm around 75kg at 180cm, I actually still have jeans I got as a gift from US (fun trivia: apparently european size is one smaller then US one, so I got them one size too big), and they still have pockets that won't properly fit a 4" phone. Luckily the "smokes" pocket on the side is perfect for my old 3.2" one.
The jeans feel like a damn tent when I try to wear them. Just what do you classify as "skinny"?! Something not morbidly obese?
Slashdot Mirror
And it's slow enough to be blown out of the sky by mobile AAA unit attached to field installations. About the only way it would have not to is to sit low and have someone else designate targets for it, like A-10s do now. Which would require fire control data providing support aircraft, which will be killed by fighters.
That depends. On one hand, the computer systems will be exceptionally complex. On the other hand cockpit and all life support systems can be eliminated, control systems can be decentralized and aircraft itself doesn't have to limit itself to human tolerance levels by design. You could build something like eurofighter that could actually push the limits of the air frame in terms of maneuverability.
So yes, in some terms it would be more complex (command and control computers). In others, it could be much less complex (command and control systems, life support). It's a bit of a mixed bag.
No, they'll instead be a nice target practice for AAA defences on the ground. They specialize in mass raping of slow and low flying targets.
Have you ever heard of AAA?
Country dependent. Here in Finland many fines are based on income, and are called päiväsakko (daily fine). The laws generally specify how many of these daily fines you pay. For example, you can get 30 daily fines for speeding.
The actual size of a fine is determined by your income based on taxation records. Our yellow press has some moments of fun when some famous hockey player gets caught speeding and ends up paying tens of thousands euroes for it.
Terabit connections are what ISPs doing those big 200meg "to each customer"-links want to use to link their switches and routers together and datacenters serving "full hd" content to millions of users want to use on their internal networks. That way, instead of having to running multiple switches over multiple cables, you could do with fewer switches/routers and cabling for the same or better performance.
At home, most machines can't properly utilize gigabit ethernet as of writing this due to internal bottlenecks of each machine. Vast majority of "integrated terabit" circutry you see advertised on motherboard packaging can barely push 300mbit on a good day. And few home users complain, because it's pretty much enough for anything home-based that you would need it for, and those few that need more will usually have pricy dedicated gear for it and methods for elimination of those internal bottlenecks.
In all the honesty, the problems are simply too big for a movement that small to address. It would probably require a massive consensus of most of the Western world to solve the conundrum of our current political and financial system (as they are currently essentially one system).
I'm not sure where you get your information, but level of sanity of your source is quite questionable. I'm not going to even bother talking about facts, of which your tirade is completely void.
First of all, majority of russians support Putin. There really is no question about this, not even in opposition camps. In fact, one of the main arguments in the opposition camps is that they need to "wake up the nation to oppose Putin". Because they're not opposing him now. Heck, even western election monitoring bodies agree on this part. They just disagree with how much of a majority support Putin commands in Russia.
As a result, Putin wouldn't have to "order an army to shoot down citizens". The anti-Putin mob would be counter mobbed by local youth groups and pro-Putin hardliners, of whom there's plenty. As has happened before.
In Syria, we have a fairly open civil war between different ethnic groups in a country where one ethnic minority has successfully oppressed all other groups for decades. To even think to compare this situation to Russia requires complete of ignorance of basic human interactions. I shudder to think what kind of environment one must live in to suffer from such illusions.
You conveniently forget the current costs for infrastructure needed to get hydrocarbons needed for transit extracted, refined and delivered world wide, which are likely at least an order of magnitude greater then simply putting more cables into the ground and erecting nuclear power plants.
Don't forget that we already have an extensive electric grid erected in most countries. It will certainly need an upgrade regardless of transportation going electric or not, as in most Western countries (European and Northern American countries, Japan and several others that had a massive grid building boom post WW2) it is long overdue for one and we're having trouble because our current grids are mostly very aged. So we might as well plan for vehicles going electric when we plan the infrastructure upgrades.
Thing is though, major infrastructure upgrades are not something that happens in a year, or even a decade. So they need to be planned decades ahead as well.
Anyone who runs cars on industrial levels, i.e. reasonably short trips with high usage times and long total travel times per day but with frequent stops wants these cars. Badly. Once infrastructure is in place, such operators are looking to save tens of percent, in many cases over half of running costs of their entire car fleets.
This includes, for example, delivery trucks, taxis, public transit and many other operators. Many operators in fact already use electric engines with or without batteries for such functions, such as busses that run off electric wires over the streets or electric trams. They even considered tricks like inductive chargers on bus stops in some places that will basically automatically charge a bus that stops over one, essentially eliminating fuelling needs of a bus, but again infrastructure build costs are simply too high in the current economy.
Other advantages of electric engines include far lower maintenance requirements due to sheer simplicity of engines, lack of exhaust fumes to pollute which is very relevant in modern large city centres and much better performance in heavy duty work.
Modern "mmo" gaming mice allow for essentially one hand gameplay in most modern games. You bind directional buttons to side buttons (or in care of rat mmo you just use the directional stick provided on the side of the mouse), as well as spread the buttons you need to control the game across the buttons available on the mouse.
It would take some time to get used to, but you should be able to play one handed without losing functionality like this.
The ONLY (let me emphasize this particular word) reason why carriers are still relevant is asymmetric nature of modern warfare. US, Russia, France, UK, China, Japan and several other countries with significant amount of modern weaponry cannot go to war with each other. If they did, life span of enemy carriers would be less then 24 hours. They're the first, and easiest targets to disable/kill as even relatively minor damage can cause too much tilt to make carrier operations impossible before significant repairs are made.
On the other hand, they excel at projecting power in asymmetric warfare, where opponent lacks modern anti-ship weaponry. For this reason, the countries with colonialist/imperialist intentions want them.
You're intentionally missing a forest for the trees. Just because citizens are represented by the state does not mean that state represents all of its citizens. Else, every time a citizen of US kills a citizen of another country, you could argue that it constitutes an act of war by your logic.
That is obviously not the case.
There are ways to fight local laws. It's called corruption outside of the Western countries and lobbying inside them.
Problem is that lobbying/corrupting in cultures very hostile to your idea is difficult. The stronger the innate resistance to your ideas, the more effort is needed, and at certain point, diminishing returns on effort simply become too great.
It's worth noting that there is a significant cultural difference at play here. What one culture considers "free speech", other may consider "defamation", "copyright infringement", "inciting of hatred" and many other things.
Consider for example the legislation in place in Germany against denying the Holocaust. Under "universal" free speech umbrella, I should be able to talk about Holocaust not having happened and it being a one big lie. Political and historical realities suggest that such free speech has potential to cause catastrophic damage, and as a result it's illegal in Germany, while legal in, for example, some Nordic countries.
To add to the mess is the current transition from centralised broadcast media to user-generated one. Much of the stuff comes from amateurs with meagre budgets, such as this movie and can be screened worldwide within minutes of being finished. This was an impossibility only a decade ago. We're in a new territory in terms of what is acceptable in different cultures, and as shown with this particular example, free speech can carry significant price paid in blood by those not even related to the speech in question.
There really are no easy solutions here. Internationalism is very difficult to make work because of cultural clashes like these. We simply have to take it one step at a time and hope and work for the best outcome.
And they are getting hit by it and hard. You can certainly test untested legislation, but you're ultimately responsible for results of such testing. In this particular case, the legislation has been tested before and Google was forced to comply. They don't want to step on the same rake again.
Funnies aside, not a good idea. High purity hydrogen makes many metal alloys brittle. Helium works so well because it's ideal gas that doesn't chemically react with almost anything.
You can oxidise hydrogen with some other gasses as well. Chlorine+hydrogen mix is very volatile and flammable for example.
+1 troll moderation is needed here.
Yes, I understand that you're a supremacist, completely unable to view the world outside your narrow lens what it "should be" as you have been taught.
Reality is, it's not chains, golden or not. It's a normal human society performing its base functions. Something that has apparently been so perverted in yours, that it rendered you apparently incapable of even understanding what the issue is, much less that there are functional and better alternatives to your very narrow view of "what should be right".
Because otherwise your friendly neighbourhood drug seller/tax evader could pretend to be doing good for the community and launder his money, as a result causing significant damage to people who actually do want to do good for the community, as well as the rest of the community.
Granted your "I won't listen to your dumb arguments you pinko commies" attitude shows that you don't care, and probably don't know that you don't have to "take up collection" for someone dying from cancer around here. He/she will be taken care of by the system, regardless of being able to afford it. It's the USA where you have to start begging people for money to get care when you're poor.
Whoever wrote this is either massively misinformed, or intentionally lying. It's very easy to simply form a ry (rekiströity yhdistys - registered organisation) and then apply for all necessary permits in this ry's name.
Seriously, this is taught here in 9th class of mandatory school. It's not rocket science. The person in question failed HARD at basics, and whoever wrote the article is basically whining "this country with different approach from mine is bad". Which as pointed above, is factually false just from looking at numbers.
It's notably that iphone is doing just fine not because, but in spite of its many flaws, one of which is lack of expandable storage.
I imagine you also keep a very good balance on your account so you can afford the foreign data roaming fees?
I'm around 75kg at 180cm, I actually still have jeans I got as a gift from US (fun trivia: apparently european size is one smaller then US one, so I got them one size too big), and they still have pockets that won't properly fit a 4" phone. Luckily the "smokes" pocket on the side is perfect for my old 3.2" one.
The jeans feel like a damn tent when I try to wear them. Just what do you classify as "skinny"?! Something not morbidly obese?