No. The guy was a lunatic. Sure, he came up with a bunch of useful stuff, but the wireless charging we have now has nothing to do whatsoever with what Tesla envisioned. It is very unfortunate that the two are denoted using the similar words, because they are far from the same. The wireless charging we have now works like an air gap in a transformer core. That effect was known well before Tesla. OTOH, his wireless energy transfer ideas would have only worked in some alternative universe with different laws of Nature. It was total lunacy.
I don't want someone, who later in life didn't seem to grasp basic experimental evidence before him, to have anything to do with designing, well, anything.
Look, if you want so desperately to do something to the payload as long as it's done on time, I'll just go and bash the shit out of it for $1M per paylod, mmkay? I can even use a $50k hammer to do it. What a steal. Cost plus of course.
Now, in the real world, is the "reasonable level of performance" you speak of the same performance USA (United Space Alliance, ULA precursor) had with getting the Shuttles into orbit? Because that was, lest we forget, a major farcical opus every time it didn't happen. But so is space flight, and SpaceX is going in exactly the right direction to change it.
Anyway, so far we don't care about lack of insurance. The damn things get whey they are supposed to. Never mind that I'd like a citation for that lack of insurance of public payloads.
I keep hearing this nonsense, and I can't help but imagine that it's coming straight from the ULA puppets. Nobody is given any free passes. They are contracted to deliver stuff to orbit, not to build rockets for the government. The safety and reliability standards are of not much use if you're being paid (or not) for service. The only ones hurting if a Falcon blows up are SpaceX and cargo insurers: the former won't get paid, the latter will have to pay up. That's all there's to it.
So far, Falcon 9 hasn't blown up once. You're just repeating the stupid ULA nonsense. Stop it.
"an epidemic of anomalies" ha ha, good one. Falcon 9 had 11/11 primary mission successes on the first 11 flights. That sort of a track record is very, very rare. Space Shuttle did it. What other launcher had the same record? Never mind the overall cost of achieving it. If one adjusts for successes per dollar of development costs, Falcon 9 will have everyone beat for a long, long time, if they keep at it.
TL;DR: F-35 would have been picked up by British radars that came into use towards the end of World War II. So much for stealth. The funniest thing? Everybody who knows about radars has known it since day one. All stealth planes suffer from this problem. Once the wavelength approaches the facet size, the fact that the facet is smooth and "points elsewhere" doesn't matter. It produces what amounts to specular highlights.
Usually, a terrestrial phone doesn't need to do anything much to "look" for a tower, besides keeping its receiver turned on. Towers emit beacons, and if you don't hear the beacon, there's no point in you sending anything - you won't receive a reply because you don't even hear the tower's beacon.
The black boxes measure physical acceleration. Sure, they can log the throttle angle, but those two things aren't in a linear relationship, and you can't infer much from the throttle angle other than determining what the driver was trying to do at the time of the crash (WOT, idle, in-between). At the very least the acceleration is a function of RPM and mass air flow. How the latter relates to throttle angle is very engine dependent.
Wii U the best library? What on Earth are you talking about. The Nintendo store looks downright depressing compared to what you get for other major consoles.
Too little, too late. Their major problem is that, for whatever reason, there are no fucking games for it - and I don't mean indie games, I mean serious stuff. Just look at what comes out for PS3/PS4 - most definitely closed platforms. Then look at what comes out for Wii U. I made the mistake of buying one. Sure, I like the console, but after playing through every major title available for it (with exception of broken-by-ui-design AC3), there's simply nothing else left for me to do on it. And no, I don't consider junk like "NintendoLand" to be a major title. It's a game collection, with some good games, but once you master one or two of them, it all becomes rather tedious. Heck, I even got the Wii Fit U. What a total waste of perfectly good hardware. The mini games ("exercises") seem to be something students would do for a class project, and the setup is the most annoying thing ever. You can't simply just get on it and have fun, nosiree.
Somehow I fondly remember VMS running on HP hardware back in the 90s. A local university had a dialup guest account. It was fun. Going back to the DOS prompt after a finished session always made me hurt and long for something better than DOS.
Write to them, using snail-mail, sent registered and with receipt confirmation. Tell them what you think. Tell them that they are to serve you, their member, not the other way round.
IEEE is both historically and contempraneously a completely practitioner-oriented organization. It's raison-d-etre is to serve enginers. Some of those engineers happen to do engineering research, but that's but a fraction of its membership.
Any form of such manual version control is ridiculous. These days you're even supposed to use something like etckeeper to keep your server's configuration under version control, and for a good reason. It comes with next to no operational overhead and lets you easily figure out where things went wrong. Initializing a git or hg repo on a folder is a two-liner. Tools like smartgit/hg, cornerstone or tortiose svn (all excellent!) let you ignore the command line interface to version control, for the most part. Who the heck has time to muck about with tarballs. If you really need them for distribution purposes, for crying out loud write a cron or hook script that generates the needed files and pushes them to a web and/or ftp server.
What is the point of source control being "handled" by a separate team? It's a tool primarily to aid the developer in her own development process. It incidentally documents the development process's history, allows maintenance of old branches, and so on, but those are side benefits that still don't require a separate team to "handle". Sure, some internal IT team would take care of deploying the repository server and keeping it running happilly and the data backed up, but goes without saying, I hope.
Now of course the other teams can use the repository to manage their code-related artifacts, such as test cases, CI configurations, and whatnot. But still - a "team" for source control? Maybe with some long obsolete tools you needed a team to handle it. I'm glad that we can replace a "team" with a couple hundred bucks worth of off-the-shelf tools.
Alas, the article refers to the contrails that show mostly failed intercepts. So you have an Iron Dome engagement, as you claim, on an incoming that was determined to be a threat. It also demonstrates in terms of high school physics why such intercepts are bound to fail in the conditions listed. It's pretty much as simple as that. The king is naked, but a lot of adults have a problem acknowledging such simple truths.
On top of that, Israel-located commenters of the article seem to have a bit of a problem with discriminating successful and failed intercepts. That's because a lot of intercepts happen during the unpowered, ballistic part of the incoming's flight. Yes, the interceptor will explode, but that's immaterial. It will poke a couple holes in the expended motor case and will alter the incoming's trajectory a slight bit. Again, it's all very simple, and people somehow can't swallow the simplicity of the argument.
It's like Feynman's famous presentation of the root material cause of the Challenger disaster. All the while the bureaucratic machine of the Commission, and NASA, was expending untold resources skirting this material cause, and the root underlying organizational cause that then proceeded to kill the Columbia crew.
Slashdot Mirror
This seems to be the most insightful thing I've read the whole day today.
No. The guy was a lunatic. Sure, he came up with a bunch of useful stuff, but the wireless charging we have now has nothing to do whatsoever with what Tesla envisioned. It is very unfortunate that the two are denoted using the similar words, because they are far from the same. The wireless charging we have now works like an air gap in a transformer core. That effect was known well before Tesla. OTOH, his wireless energy transfer ideas would have only worked in some alternative universe with different laws of Nature. It was total lunacy.
Quick, somebody clone Nikola Tesla!
I don't want someone, who later in life didn't seem to grasp basic experimental evidence before him, to have anything to do with designing, well, anything.
Look, if you want so desperately to do something to the payload as long as it's done on time, I'll just go and bash the shit out of it for $1M per paylod, mmkay? I can even use a $50k hammer to do it. What a steal. Cost plus of course.
Now, in the real world, is the "reasonable level of performance" you speak of the same performance USA (United Space Alliance, ULA precursor) had with getting the Shuttles into orbit? Because that was, lest we forget, a major farcical opus every time it didn't happen. But so is space flight, and SpaceX is going in exactly the right direction to change it.
Anyway, so far we don't care about lack of insurance. The damn things get whey they are supposed to. Never mind that I'd like a citation for that lack of insurance of public payloads.
I keep hearing this nonsense, and I can't help but imagine that it's coming straight from the ULA puppets. Nobody is given any free passes. They are contracted to deliver stuff to orbit, not to build rockets for the government. The safety and reliability standards are of not much use if you're being paid (or not) for service. The only ones hurting if a Falcon blows up are SpaceX and cargo insurers: the former won't get paid, the latter will have to pay up. That's all there's to it.
So far, Falcon 9 hasn't blown up once. You're just repeating the stupid ULA nonsense. Stop it.
"an epidemic of anomalies" ha ha, good one. Falcon 9 had 11/11 primary mission successes on the first 11 flights. That sort of a track record is very, very rare. Space Shuttle did it. What other launcher had the same record? Never mind the overall cost of achieving it. If one adjusts for successes per dollar of development costs, Falcon 9 will have everyone beat for a long, long time, if they keep at it.
Enter the synthetic aperture radar :)
TL;DR: F-35 would have been picked up by British radars that came into use towards the end of World War II. So much for stealth. The funniest thing? Everybody who knows about radars has known it since day one. All stealth planes suffer from this problem. Once the wavelength approaches the facet size, the fact that the facet is smooth and "points elsewhere" doesn't matter. It produces what amounts to specular highlights.
Usually, a terrestrial phone doesn't need to do anything much to "look" for a tower, besides keeping its receiver turned on. Towers emit beacons, and if you don't hear the beacon, there's no point in you sending anything - you won't receive a reply because you don't even hear the tower's beacon.
s/GSM/GPS/, duh.
For multiple devices, the GSM-like CDMA would be viable. Each transmitter can use its own Gold code.
The black boxes measure physical acceleration. Sure, they can log the throttle angle, but those two things aren't in a linear relationship, and you can't infer much from the throttle angle other than determining what the driver was trying to do at the time of the crash (WOT, idle, in-between). At the very least the acceleration is a function of RPM and mass air flow. How the latter relates to throttle angle is very engine dependent.
CoD and Halo? Whaaat? Have you seen this?
Wii U the best library? What on Earth are you talking about. The Nintendo store looks downright depressing compared to what you get for other major consoles.
Too little, too late. Their major problem is that, for whatever reason, there are no fucking games for it - and I don't mean indie games, I mean serious stuff. Just look at what comes out for PS3/PS4 - most definitely closed platforms. Then look at what comes out for Wii U. I made the mistake of buying one. Sure, I like the console, but after playing through every major title available for it (with exception of broken-by-ui-design AC3), there's simply nothing else left for me to do on it. And no, I don't consider junk like "NintendoLand" to be a major title. It's a game collection, with some good games, but once you master one or two of them, it all becomes rather tedious. Heck, I even got the Wii Fit U. What a total waste of perfectly good hardware. The mini games ("exercises") seem to be something students would do for a class project, and the setup is the most annoying thing ever. You can't simply just get on it and have fun, nosiree.
Sorry, I can't type, it was DEC hardware, duh.
Somehow I fondly remember VMS running on HP hardware back in the 90s. A local university had a dialup guest account. It was fun. Going back to the DOS prompt after a finished session always made me hurt and long for something better than DOS.
Write to them, using snail-mail, sent registered and with receipt confirmation. Tell them what you think. Tell them that they are to serve you, their member, not the other way round.
IEEE is both historically and contempraneously a completely practitioner-oriented organization. It's raison-d-etre is to serve enginers. Some of those engineers happen to do engineering research, but that's but a fraction of its membership.
Any form of such manual version control is ridiculous. These days you're even supposed to use something like etckeeper to keep your server's configuration under version control, and for a good reason. It comes with next to no operational overhead and lets you easily figure out where things went wrong. Initializing a git or hg repo on a folder is a two-liner. Tools like smartgit/hg, cornerstone or tortiose svn (all excellent!) let you ignore the command line interface to version control, for the most part. Who the heck has time to muck about with tarballs. If you really need them for distribution purposes, for crying out loud write a cron or hook script that generates the needed files and pushes them to a web and/or ftp server.
I agree with your points but one.
What is the point of source control being "handled" by a separate team? It's a tool primarily to aid the developer in her own development process. It incidentally documents the development process's history, allows maintenance of old branches, and so on, but those are side benefits that still don't require a separate team to "handle". Sure, some internal IT team would take care of deploying the repository server and keeping it running happilly and the data backed up, but goes without saying, I hope.
Now of course the other teams can use the repository to manage their code-related artifacts, such as test cases, CI configurations, and whatnot. But still - a "team" for source control? Maybe with some long obsolete tools you needed a team to handle it. I'm glad that we can replace a "team" with a couple hundred bucks worth of off-the-shelf tools.
I'd just run my own "cloud" instead, using, say KVM. With billing etc. like in the old times.
Alas, the article refers to the contrails that show mostly failed intercepts. So you have an Iron Dome engagement, as you claim, on an incoming that was determined to be a threat. It also demonstrates in terms of high school physics why such intercepts are bound to fail in the conditions listed. It's pretty much as simple as that. The king is naked, but a lot of adults have a problem acknowledging such simple truths.
On top of that, Israel-located commenters of the article seem to have a bit of a problem with discriminating successful and failed intercepts. That's because a lot of intercepts happen during the unpowered, ballistic part of the incoming's flight. Yes, the interceptor will explode, but that's immaterial. It will poke a couple holes in the expended motor case and will alter the incoming's trajectory a slight bit. Again, it's all very simple, and people somehow can't swallow the simplicity of the argument.
It's like Feynman's famous presentation of the root material cause of the Challenger disaster. All the while the bureaucratic machine of the Commission, and NASA, was expending untold resources skirting this material cause, and the root underlying organizational cause that then proceeded to kill the Columbia crew.
The way Bennet describes the particular phone, a $100 Tracfone ZTE sounds like a much better deal.
Interesting. One learns every day! Thanks.