Significantly cheaper actually and gives more stick time to pilots when there are limited airframes available. It costs a lot of money each time you go up, but the sim is basically a sunk cost.
No it's not. There's no denying that there are black programs pulling the defense budget, but with a high vis program with a lot of congressional oversight like the F-35, the programs numbers will give an accurate view of the cost per plane. The DOD has had a lot of attention on aquisition recently that has driven thsi. The final numbers are still in flux though as the program goes through inevitable developmental problems.
The C-130s being flown today might as well be a different aircraft than the A models that came into service in the '50s. The Air Force is moving to J-models today which is a completely new airframe. The key is that it doesn't really need to change what it does as a theater level regional airlifter so the model upgrade path can work. That's not the case for fighters. The F-15/F-16/F-18s being flown today, with the exception of the Super Hornet are all 4th gen fighters that are outclassed by newer airframes like the MiG-35. US tactics and training help them carry the edge today, but the truth is that these airframes bring many nations a lot closer to fighter parity than the US can afford to have. Incremental improvements like slapping an AESA radar on F-15s can help, but that's a stopgap at best.
Mainland China and Taiwan's reelationship is better than it has been in decades. Taiwan realizes they can make nice with China and stil maintain independence. China realizes that they look better on teh international scene by playing nice with their "misinformed children".
The Playbook is RIM trying to capture the corporate market. If I was them, I'd do that too. Big companies will love the fact that it will (I expect) ultimately integrate with their existing BES infrastructure and IT already has the back end training to support it.
Blackberries still own the enterprise level market, though both iOS and Android are making a run on them as more users want to use the phone they are familiar with. RIM will ultimately need to make a major innovation leap to keep it though.
It's even worse. Back when I was working on my Masters part of my thesis was an experiment on PC usage. Basically, it turned out that if you put an old PC and a new PC side by side, and told people as part of the test they would be using the newer one, they had the most user satisfaction regardless of which machine they actually used. You could theoretically buy them a new looking case with the same guts and they would be fine.
The sad part is that even Facebook can do this already. Out here I get ads in German for local stuff. When I travel back to the US I get my US ads again. The modle is there, the distributers are just to lazy to implement it.
Great. Now stop blocking content to it based on geolocation. I'm getting real tired of hitting Youtube videos in Germany where the "content is not avaialbe in your region." I'm actually willing to watch your ads if you'd just let me see the content without resorting to some sort of VPN or proxy solution.
Solar and wind are sold as the alternatives in Germany, but the fact it they'll never get there here to a level that replaces nuclear. On every high point around here in southeastern Germany there are already windmills filing them. This week is also only the second one in months that I have seen the sun with any consistency.
Green party just swept several elections in the country on the anti-nuclear coattails, so it's not getting any better.
Bullshit. Nobody says that.(can you provide a link to posts that do?)
Here's one from the article linked by Ash, and I didn't even have to look that hard: "No, because in that example, you're depriving them of physical goods (unlike when pirates copy data, thereby depriving no one of anything)" and "That's because that does ACTUAL harm to someone by DEPRIVING them of a good that is not in infinite supply. No one copied anything in that example, they deprived someone of something physical."
And a statement like this seems so come up whenever copyright comes up. I'm too lazy to go back and look others up, but I know because I get beat up every time I even remotely relate it to theft, although I'm talking from a moral perspective and not the copyright piece.
What's being done here is not really all that differrent from bittorrenting an MP3
And if you go back and read it, I never said it was the same. I just noted similarities. I agree that the resale is the bigger crime here. Seeding a torrent is still redistributing the file where others can get it without paying the copyright owner. Here someone else sells it on the app market. The end result is the same: the owner of the work does not get paid for that copy.
Not according to Slashdot users. Every single time copyright infringement or copying music/movies/etc. comes up on this site, the users here overwhelmingly argue that unless there is some physical thing taken, it's OK becuase it's not theft. With that standard, there's nothing being physically taken so there is no loss to the developer. I don't agree with that, but it's pretty clear a lot of folks here do.
What's being done here is not really all that differrent from bittorrenting an MP3 if you think about it (although there is a money piece involved). With that you're taking a copy of the song for your use and then providing it to other people who, in theory, should have to get it from the original copyright owner if they want it. Same thing here just a lot more blatant using the app market as the distribution means.
Or, you could learn to read a map which is apparently too difficulut these days. Somehow the world used to function without GPS and we still got from point A to point B OK.
Actually this one was pretty clear to me and actually seemed to at least be related to the article, which seems to be the hard part these days with the editors.
It's illegal (in the US and Europe at a minumum) because you are running an unlicensed transmitter in a frequency spectrum you are not authorized. The issue from the 4G article was that the devices were built poorly and frequency overlap would block it out. Not the same as intentional jamming.
It's an issue if the military only went to the Republicans or Democrats as a party and cuddled up with one or the other. TFA clearly states that this was directed at all the visitors, regardless of party. There is no issue with organizations in the military disucssing funding issues with a congressional representative. Funding gov't organizations like the DoD is part of their job. If the parties choose to use miltary spending, benefits, construction, etc. as partisan issues, that's not on the military, that's on them.
While the use of Psy-Ops troops on visiting delgations is certainly questionable, the Hatch Act reference is ridiculous.
The intent of the Hatch Act is so that gov't employees, in this case uniformed soldiers, do not participate in patisan polital issues. It means that you can't run down to your local Republican or Democrat rally in uniform and support your guy. The reason is that it is implied support by the government for one candiate or party over another which the govenrment as an entity cannot do. It does not mean that when the congress who pays your bills comes to you that you cannot express shortfalls to them in hopes of gaining support for your mission.
And you can do this cheap. I've been using this concept for years. Anytime I need a disposable address I just go in and add it as an alias using that site's domain name such as theirdomamainname@mydomain.com.
This also gives me the added benefit of knowing exactly who gives away my e-mail address when it starts showing up in spam filters.
Slashdot Mirror
Significantly cheaper actually and gives more stick time to pilots when there are limited airframes available. It costs a lot of money each time you go up, but the sim is basically a sunk cost.
No it's not. There's no denying that there are black programs pulling the defense budget, but with a high vis program with a lot of congressional oversight like the F-35, the programs numbers will give an accurate view of the cost per plane. The DOD has had a lot of attention on aquisition recently that has driven thsi. The final numbers are still in flux though as the program goes through inevitable developmental problems.
The C-130s being flown today might as well be a different aircraft than the A models that came into service in the '50s. The Air Force is moving to J-models today which is a completely new airframe. The key is that it doesn't really need to change what it does as a theater level regional airlifter so the model upgrade path can work. That's not the case for fighters. The F-15/F-16/F-18s being flown today, with the exception of the Super Hornet are all 4th gen fighters that are outclassed by newer airframes like the MiG-35. US tactics and training help them carry the edge today, but the truth is that these airframes bring many nations a lot closer to fighter parity than the US can afford to have. Incremental improvements like slapping an AESA radar on F-15s can help, but that's a stopgap at best.
Mainland China and Taiwan's reelationship is better than it has been in decades. Taiwan realizes they can make nice with China and stil maintain independence. China realizes that they look better on teh international scene by playing nice with their "misinformed children".
The Playbook is RIM trying to capture the corporate market. If I was them, I'd do that too. Big companies will love the fact that it will (I expect) ultimately integrate with their existing BES infrastructure and IT already has the back end training to support it. Blackberries still own the enterprise level market, though both iOS and Android are making a run on them as more users want to use the phone they are familiar with. RIM will ultimately need to make a major innovation leap to keep it though.
I would argue that number 4 is still at the top of the stack for why people pirate.
It's even worse. Back when I was working on my Masters part of my thesis was an experiment on PC usage. Basically, it turned out that if you put an old PC and a new PC side by side, and told people as part of the test they would be using the newer one, they had the most user satisfaction regardless of which machine they actually used. You could theoretically buy them a new looking case with the same guts and they would be fine.
The sad part is that even Facebook can do this already. Out here I get ads in German for local stuff. When I travel back to the US I get my US ads again. The modle is there, the distributers are just to lazy to implement it.
Great. Now stop blocking content to it based on geolocation. I'm getting real tired of hitting Youtube videos in Germany where the "content is not avaialbe in your region." I'm actually willing to watch your ads if you'd just let me see the content without resorting to some sort of VPN or proxy solution.
When the crime causes public backlash and affects the company bottom line, there is nothing to compensate the employees with.
Green party just swept several elections in the country on the anti-nuclear coattails, so it's not getting any better.
Hate repying to myself. The post ended up below.
Looked at that link. Where's your proof?
See my post above and try reading the linked article comments.
Bullshit. Nobody says that.(can you provide a link to posts that do?)
Here's one from the article linked by Ash, and I didn't even have to look that hard: "No, because in that example, you're depriving them of physical goods (unlike when pirates copy data, thereby depriving no one of anything)" and "That's because that does ACTUAL harm to someone by DEPRIVING them of a good that is not in infinite supply. No one copied anything in that example, they deprived someone of something physical."
And a statement like this seems so come up whenever copyright comes up. I'm too lazy to go back and look others up, but I know because I get beat up every time I even remotely relate it to theft, although I'm talking from a moral perspective and not the copyright piece.
What's being done here is not really all that differrent from bittorrenting an MP3
And if you go back and read it, I never said it was the same. I just noted similarities. I agree that the resale is the bigger crime here. Seeding a torrent is still redistributing the file where others can get it without paying the copyright owner. Here someone else sells it on the app market. The end result is the same: the owner of the work does not get paid for that copy.
This is actual theft.
Not according to Slashdot users. Every single time copyright infringement or copying music/movies/etc. comes up on this site, the users here overwhelmingly argue that unless there is some physical thing taken, it's OK becuase it's not theft. With that standard, there's nothing being physically taken so there is no loss to the developer. I don't agree with that, but it's pretty clear a lot of folks here do.
What's being done here is not really all that differrent from bittorrenting an MP3 if you think about it (although there is a money piece involved). With that you're taking a copy of the song for your use and then providing it to other people who, in theory, should have to get it from the original copyright owner if they want it. Same thing here just a lot more blatant using the app market as the distribution means.
So we're using first person shooters where the goal is to kill everything that looks like a human to help train AIs. This can only end well. . .
You must be new here.
Actually, GPS is designed to work with 4 satellites. More just get you a better signal.
Or, you could learn to read a map which is apparently too difficulut these days. Somehow the world used to function without GPS and we still got from point A to point B OK.
Actually this one was pretty clear to me and actually seemed to at least be related to the article, which seems to be the hard part these days with the editors.
It's illegal (in the US and Europe at a minumum) because you are running an unlicensed transmitter in a frequency spectrum you are not authorized. The issue from the 4G article was that the devices were built poorly and frequency overlap would block it out. Not the same as intentional jamming.
It's an issue if the military only went to the Republicans or Democrats as a party and cuddled up with one or the other. TFA clearly states that this was directed at all the visitors, regardless of party. There is no issue with organizations in the military disucssing funding issues with a congressional representative. Funding gov't organizations like the DoD is part of their job. If the parties choose to use miltary spending, benefits, construction, etc. as partisan issues, that's not on the military, that's on them.
While the use of Psy-Ops troops on visiting delgations is certainly questionable, the Hatch Act reference is ridiculous. The intent of the Hatch Act is so that gov't employees, in this case uniformed soldiers, do not participate in patisan polital issues. It means that you can't run down to your local Republican or Democrat rally in uniform and support your guy. The reason is that it is implied support by the government for one candiate or party over another which the govenrment as an entity cannot do. It does not mean that when the congress who pays your bills comes to you that you cannot express shortfalls to them in hopes of gaining support for your mission.
And you can do this cheap. I've been using this concept for years. Anytime I need a disposable address I just go in and add it as an alias using that site's domain name such as theirdomamainname@mydomain.com. This also gives me the added benefit of knowing exactly who gives away my e-mail address when it starts showing up in spam filters.
There's a third party?