Sigh, rah rah linux fanboyism will never contribute to Linux' success -- above all when the premise is mistaken. The Siemens SCADA controller software that Stuxnet targets does not exist for Linux so the point is moot. The Iranians used the Siemens SCADA systems because they were cheap & could normally perform the job instead of having to pour major resources into developing their own from scratch. As the same SCADA controllers are commonly used to control the electrical grid & water treatment facilities. So, given that you presumably use use both doesn't that make you a loser too?
I don't know about the GP but first off, I don't call border guards luring tourists to come closer & then when they do imprisoning them & theratening them with 25 year sentences for spying normal relations.
Secondly, while I won't cry over dead Iranian nuclear scientists I don't believe that the USG has killed any of them. Ask an Israeli whether he fells justified in his government killing the scientists helping to build a bomb for a country that regularly threatens them with extermination.
Lastly, while what is going on is indeed war in my opinion it's a cold war & as such there are many things which neither side will do on purpose. Directly causing deaths goes over the line making your question more hyperbole than serious conjecture.
Yes I remember the airbus but I also consider it to have been a mistake.
Any bombing of the Pentagon, Whitehouse, etc that was traced back to Iran would get the US to respond making Preying Mantis look like a sideshow.
You are either confused or you didn't read TFA. This is a $10 million private sector development. Yes they are trying to interest the Navy/CG but were they really interested is would have been mentioned. If you want to beat on government spending go find a subject where the government is actually doing the spending.
TFA states only that the boat "cannot be heard 50 feet away" thanks to a muffler system with no further details. Reading between the lines the missing words are above surface. Between the frontal props, the super cavitation & the muffler exhaust which is certainly below water, any sonar will hear it from faaaaaar away. They may not be able to hit it with a torpedo & it seems to have some stealth tech against radar but a maverick missile or equivalent wil ruin it's day...
The problem is that in much of Europe the subtitles are imposed by legislation for those without the level to understand the original tongue. Omnipresent government committees must protect the feeble to justify their existence...
I've seen worse though in Belgium where the movie was subtitled in all three official languages: French, Dutch & German.
I have Amblyopia (one eye is stronger than the other) so 3D really doesn't do much for me. In addition I live in France where like most of the world outside the US, people who want to see movies in english have to put up with subtitles. The last movie I saw in 3D (Avengers) put the subtitles about a foot away from your face, which was really distracting & tiring (you don't want to focus on the subtitles but THEY'RE IN YOUR FACE). and decided once again to abstain from 3D if at all possible.
I saw Prometheus and feel that all your points on how great the movie was in 3D are overblown. The worm in the eye scene didn't need to be 3D to be creepy. The guys eyeball was most of the screen so 3D added little to nothing. The people I saw Prometheus with who all have normal vision are of the same opinion. 3D is a useless money grabbing technique that adds little & often distracts from the experience.
While they may eventually develop technologies to make a center engine failure recoverable to a landing to a flat pad, I don't see it happing for a while.
The engines cannot throttle below 50% max thrust which makes landing on empty tanks "interesting" as a single engine's minimum output is close to producing more thrust than a near empty first stage. Needing to balance a failed center engine makes it pretty much impossible as throttling control does not at present have the accuracy needed to reliably blow off descending velocity at the last second.. It'd be like braking a train to a halt within inches from 200 Mph at the last second instead of reducing speed as the stop approaches.
Landing using off axis thrusters doesn't look to me to be any better. They do not appear to be planning on robust landing gear (normal given the weight constraints). Nor do they plan on having the F9 1st stage settle into a landing cradle that could correct for off axis thrust. At present they seem to plan on having the 1st stage come down to a gradual stop above a flat landing with the booster perfectly vertical and with no lateral or axial motion. straightening out from an off axis engine would introduce too much momentum to be annulled unless that also have some significant verniers at the top of the stage.
So, dropping the booster into a lake seems to have a better chance of recovering as much of the 1st stage as they can.after a center engine failure. No falling over & exploding , just probable damage to the still hot engine(s) used for the last stage of the landing.
I don't know but I assume that landing crooked would preclude landing on a hard surface. As conjecture maybe they'd prefer dropping a reusable F9 with a failed center engine into a lake rather than have it tip over, fall & possibly explode
Losing the center engine of a reusable F9 may not cause the loss of the payload but appears to guarantee the loss of the reusable first stage.
Last stage of the reusable F9 landing uses only the center engine and thrust/weight appears to be workable in only a narrow range. Having to use two engines that cannot throttle lower than 50% to maintain balance seems to be unworkable.
you're the only one saying that he "arranged to be accused of rape"..
My point was that once the Swedes told him that he had to come back to be questioned, instead of doing so with no fuss he has drawn the process out fore years & never wasted an opportunity to recenter the spotlight back on himself. The man is the male equivalent of Paris Hilton. Bad publicity is better than no publicity for people like them. You want to believe the drama queens/publicity hogs? Go ahead but many of us watch his antics & see someone more concerned with being famous than truthful.
Assange does not get to chose how the Swedish legal system works. Thats why answering over a vidcam was DOA. He should have just jumped on a plane & taken care of the questions years ago, but no? Assange needs to be at the center of the spotlight.
Either he knows that he is not as innocent as he claims & he does face time in prison for rape as the women say or he will be questioned & released by the Swedish police after wasting years of everyones time.
Not from what I've heard from the man. He's been screaming that he shouldn't be extradited because: - It's all a plot by the USG - The USG will extradite him from Sweden once he leaves the UK (never ind that extradition to the US would be easier from the UK) - He claims he's innocent so he shouldn't be extradited. - Leaving the UK would be an enormous hardship for him.
On the merits of the case: "does the Swedish extradition request meet the requirements for an extradition" he's been well nigh silent as the courts have confirmed that the extradition is both justified & legal every step of the way.
If he's as innocent as he pretends he should have gone back to Sweden years ago to get all this behind him, but no, Assange has been milking this out for years.
Slashdot Mirror
Pffff.... quibbler. Ahmadinejad's accepted statement that "The very notion of Israel is dead" is close enough to make no difference.
Sigh, rah rah linux fanboyism will never contribute to Linux' success -- above all when the premise is mistaken. The Siemens SCADA controller software that Stuxnet targets does not exist for Linux so the point is moot. The Iranians used the Siemens SCADA systems because they were cheap & could normally perform the job instead of having to pour major resources into developing their own from scratch. As the same SCADA controllers are commonly used to control the electrical grid & water treatment facilities. So, given that you presumably use use both doesn't that make you a loser too?
MS abandoned their insane restrictions of having different serial numbers for OEM & retail versions of Windows with Vista.
Your definition of "nuclear facilities" is overlarge
Lol, precisely. But do you think that Gabrill actually got your point? I'm kind of doubting it.
I don't know about the GP but first off, I don't call border guards luring tourists to come closer & then when they do imprisoning them & theratening them with 25 year sentences for spying normal relations.
Secondly, while I won't cry over dead Iranian nuclear scientists I don't believe that the USG has killed any of them. Ask an Israeli whether he fells justified in his government killing the scientists helping to build a bomb for a country that regularly threatens them with extermination.
Lastly, while what is going on is indeed war in my opinion it's a cold war & as such there are many things which neither side will do on purpose. Directly causing deaths goes over the line making your question more hyperbole than serious conjecture.
Yes I remember the airbus but I also consider it to have been a mistake.
Any bombing of the Pentagon, Whitehouse, etc that was traced back to Iran would get the US to respond making Preying Mantis look like a sideshow.
Your statement "With no air friction it will be rocking back and forth "forever"" conclusively establishes which one of us is daft.
You are either confused or you didn't read TFA. This is a $10 million private sector development. Yes they are trying to interest the Navy/CG but were they really interested is would have been mentioned. If you want to beat on government spending go find a subject where the government is actually doing the spending.
TFA states only that the boat "cannot be heard 50 feet away" thanks to a muffler system with no further details. Reading between the lines the missing words are above surface. Between the frontal props, the super cavitation & the muffler exhaust which is certainly below water, any sonar will hear it from faaaaaar away. They may not be able to hit it with a torpedo & it seems to have some stealth tech against radar but a maverick missile or equivalent wil ruin it's day...
I wish...
The problem is that in much of Europe the subtitles are imposed by legislation for those without the level to understand the original tongue. Omnipresent government committees must protect the feeble to justify their existence...
I've seen worse though in Belgium where the movie was subtitled in all three official languages: French, Dutch & German.
It needs to be in a category all by itself to avoid its sales figures being completely dominated by the iPad or being a footnote to other Win8 sales.
That way Microsoft can crow about how they are number one in their category however tepidly the devices sell...
Air friction, riiiight... Try reading about this new force a fellow by the name of Newton described recently: It's called gravity...
OK but then the issue becomes does the 3d bring enough to the plot/movie to justify the discomfort and supplemental cost?
For me the answer is clearly no.
Air friction?!? Compared to the intertia that spinning an off axis booster weighing over 30000 lbs to level to compensate for an off axis engine!?!
I'll stop now as you have just demonstrated that you clearly have little grasp of the forces in play.
I have Amblyopia (one eye is stronger than the other) so 3D really doesn't do much for me. In addition I live in France where like most of the world outside the US, people who want to see movies in english have to put up with subtitles. The last movie I saw in 3D (Avengers) put the subtitles about a foot away from your face, which was really distracting & tiring (you don't want to focus on the subtitles but THEY'RE IN YOUR FACE). and decided once again to abstain from 3D if at all possible.
I saw Prometheus and feel that all your points on how great the movie was in 3D are overblown. The worm in the eye scene didn't need to be 3D to be creepy. The guys eyeball was most of the screen so 3D added little to nothing. The people I saw Prometheus with who all have normal vision are of the same opinion. 3D is a useless money grabbing technique that adds little & often distracts from the experience.
While they may eventually develop technologies to make a center engine failure recoverable to a landing to a flat pad, I don't see it happing for a while.
The engines cannot throttle below 50% max thrust which makes landing on empty tanks "interesting" as a single engine's minimum output is close to producing more thrust than a near empty first stage. Needing to balance a failed center engine makes it pretty much impossible as throttling control does not at present have the accuracy needed to reliably blow off descending velocity at the last second.. It'd be like braking a train to a halt within inches from 200 Mph at the last second instead of reducing speed as the stop approaches.
Landing using off axis thrusters doesn't look to me to be any better. They do not appear to be planning on robust landing gear (normal given the weight constraints). Nor do they plan on having the F9 1st stage settle into a landing cradle that could correct for off axis thrust. At present they seem to plan on having the 1st stage come down to a gradual stop above a flat landing with the booster perfectly vertical and with no lateral or axial motion. straightening out from an off axis engine would introduce too much momentum to be annulled unless that also have some significant verniers at the top of the stage.
So, dropping the booster into a lake seems to have a better chance of recovering as much of the 1st stage as they can.after a center engine failure. No falling over & exploding , just probable damage to the still hot engine(s) used for the last stage of the landing.
I don't know but I assume that landing crooked would preclude landing on a hard surface. As conjecture maybe they'd prefer dropping a reusable F9 with a failed center engine into a lake rather than have it tip over, fall & possibly explode
Losing the center engine of a reusable F9 may not cause the loss of the payload but appears to guarantee the loss of the reusable first stage.
Last stage of the reusable F9 landing uses only the center engine and thrust/weight appears to be workable in only a narrow range. Having to use two engines that cannot throttle lower than 50% to maintain balance seems to be unworkable.
There is no better way to convince people that you were born yesterday than to be ignorant of history.
As someone who has seen a few generations of these girls go by, I can say that the BB's of around 15 years ago were less dressed than they are now
I've had plastic screened phones in the past, no more. They get all scratched up and touch screen's sucked when new & just got worse over time.
Glass has properties that make it much better for touchscreens & is being improved all the time. The paper thin glass that Corning has just developped may make most glass even better: http://arstechnica.com/business/2012/06/new-willow-glass-is-rollable-and-paper-thin/
I don't see a fragile rubbery surface as an improvement...
you're the only one saying that he "arranged to be accused of rape"..
My point was that once the Swedes told him that he had to come back to be questioned, instead of doing so with no fuss he has drawn the process out fore years & never wasted an opportunity to recenter the spotlight back on himself. The man is the male equivalent of Paris Hilton. Bad publicity is better than no publicity for people like them. You want to believe the drama queens/publicity hogs? Go ahead but many of us watch his antics & see someone more concerned with being famous than truthful.
Learn to use google or read the articles linked to in the different /. stories about the Assange rape case over the years.
From what I've seen of Assange, the object has always been more about him steering the spotlight his way than Wikileaks or rape.
Assange does not get to chose how the Swedish legal system works. Thats why answering over a vidcam was DOA. He should have just jumped on a plane & taken care of the questions years ago, but no? Assange needs to be at the center of the spotlight.
Either he knows that he is not as innocent as he claims & he does face time in prison for rape as the women say or he will be questioned & released by the Swedish police after wasting years of everyones time.
Not from what I've heard from the man. He's been screaming that he shouldn't be extradited because:
- It's all a plot by the USG
- The USG will extradite him from Sweden once he leaves the UK (never ind that extradition to the US would be easier from the UK)
- He claims he's innocent so he shouldn't be extradited.
- Leaving the UK would be an enormous hardship for him.
On the merits of the case: "does the Swedish extradition request meet the requirements for an extradition" he's been well nigh silent as the courts have confirmed that the extradition is both justified & legal every step of the way.
If he's as innocent as he pretends he should have gone back to Sweden years ago to get all this behind him, but no, Assange has been milking this out for years.