I don't disagree with what you are saying, but I don't see how someone could build a system such as you describe. There are millions of pieces and parts in the shuttle system. How do you design a system, in the real world, that can magically compute every piece of data and produce a fail safe system? One of the checks before launch is some guy flying a plane around downrange to make sure nobody is out there in case of an abort. In your scenario we would have to remove this person and automate this process, that would be really tough. I'm not saying it's impossible, I just don't think trying to handle every situation automagically is feasible.
The Solid Rocket Boosters were being operated below there rated operating temperature, i.e. it was too damn cold to launch the shuttle. Everybody who wasn't a manager who worked on these things knew this.
I'm note sure were to find this particular data. But when the engineers at the company who built these things say "Hmmm, it's probably not a good idea to launch in this cold weather." Somebody should rethink pushing the launch button.
There exists no system in the world that can prevent you from operating outside of specifications. That's what specs are for, this item rated to operate within these parameters. How could you build such a complex system? A giant asteroid hitting the earth would be operating the shuttle out of spec, I don't know any engineers that can build a shuttle that automatically prevents asteroids from hitting the earth. Your argument is a strawman argument.
Actually no. The Challenger accident was not a statistical failure of the shuttle so it should not be included. Engineers knew the boosters were being operated outside of their specifications. Once someone decides to launch outside of operating parameters all bets are off. So your past performance for at least one failure shouldn't count because you were operating outside of specs.
Sorry, you are wrong. So if I purchase a lottery ticket tonight and win, are my odds now 1 in 1 of winning the lottery if I purchase another ticket? Past performance does not dictate future performance a string of close spaced events will most likely be outweighed put future events being spaced further apart.
If I had my choice, I would much rather be debating our role in Iraq, the national economy, and patent law instead of whether the presidents cock should have been stuffed down an interns throat.
You just described buffer overflow. Some programmer thinks, "Hey nobody will ever send this function a zero terminated character array longer than 80 characters.". Designing for safety entails be able to handle an input string of any arbitrary length and handling error conditions sanely.
This is what revlolutions are for. Here in the U.S. the instructions for such are in the Declaration of Independence:
That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.
How does a nativity scene force my religion upon you?
Example: Local government alows a group to display a nativity scene in the city park, no problem. The local Druids see this display and decide "We should be able to honor the Great Oak with our display." City government says "No way, you suck with your Great Oak". At this point the local government has violated the separation of church and state by indirectly endorsing a particular religion.
What? I had an internet account that I paid for and was in my name when I was 15. So yes, a child CAN have their own "internet bill"
In serveral (maybe many?) states of the union, a child under 18 can not legally enter into a binding contract. This is ignored for most purposes, think of people under 18 buying cell phones and service. But either way it is the law, and it does come up occasionaly as an issue.
If the man at 10ft has the gun pointing at your head your screwed, no question there.
Within arms reach, I'll go against the guy with gun any day. The man with the knife just has to start slashing and he will be doing damage, and I can't easily grab the knife because I'll get cut up.
The man with the gun has to actually point the barrel at me. If he's within arms reach like the other guy, you have a better chance going for the gun and keeping it pointed away from you.
It's also very hard to cause much damage with a gun without making a big racket and drawing attention. (And yes silencers are not actually silent.) It doesn't take a lot of skill to kill someone with a knife and have that operation be completely silent.
Take some courses on pistols and self defense and you'll realize the world isn't like the movies.
I am curious. Why would one need to defend one's home in the first place?
Yeah, the liberaly biased media must be making up all those stories of home invasion. That's the only way they can support gun control, look at all the loons running around with guns breaking into peoples houses.
Or, maybe your just plain wrong.
By the way, I live in a suburb of Detroit. So if you happen to live in HappyVille where no one so much as speeds, I apologize.
And pray tell me why wars are fought primarily with firearms?
First, we weren't talking about war. Second, your example with kids wasn't what we were talking about.
The scenario is someone steals an item from you, $DANGEROUS_ITEM, then purposely cause mayhem with said $DANGEROUS_ITEM.
If you were reasonably competent in securing $DANGEROUS_ITEM, but the above individual broke through locks, doors, whatever, how is it you are responsible?
This is the point being made. A dipshit leaving his firearm sitting on the endtable for his kid to take is not the example. One doesn't win an argument by presenting straw man arguments that don't pertain to the issue being discussed.
Nice nirvana you live in. So if someone breaks into your house while you are on vacation, and does all this stuff you will consider yourself responsible? You didn't report it, so you must be responsible.
Regardless of what people want to believe, an individual can only go so far in securing his possesions. After that that fault SHOULD lie with the individual commiting the crime. Not the owners of the implements.
Slashdot Mirror
That land yacht they called the Buick Roadmaster was pretty big. I'm sure a used one would be very safe.
They don't want to do that. Last time they had a revolution they lost the colonies.
Hmmm, matter of fact, I seem to recall that revolution being about taxes and a pain-in-the-ass king.
Yeah I agree 100%! Those 2,800 people in the WTC didn't have to die.
I don't disagree with what you are saying, but I don't see how someone could build a system such as you describe. There are millions of pieces and parts in the shuttle system. How do you design a system, in the real world, that can magically compute every piece of data and produce a fail safe system? One of the checks before launch is some guy flying a plane around downrange to make sure nobody is out there in case of an abort. In your scenario we would have to remove this person and automate this process, that would be really tough. I'm not saying it's impossible, I just don't think trying to handle every situation automagically is feasible.
The Solid Rocket Boosters were being operated below there rated operating temperature, i.e. it was too damn cold to launch the shuttle. Everybody who wasn't a manager who worked on these things knew this.
I'm note sure were to find this particular data. But when the engineers at the company who built these things say "Hmmm, it's probably not a good idea to launch in this cold weather." Somebody should rethink pushing the launch button.
I wonder how many people will think the odds of tails coming up will be greater because of the previous 10 flips all being heads?
There exists no system in the world that can prevent you from operating outside of specifications. That's what specs are for, this item rated to operate within these parameters. How could you build such a complex system? A giant asteroid hitting the earth would be operating the shuttle out of spec, I don't know any engineers that can build a shuttle that automatically prevents asteroids from hitting the earth. Your argument is a strawman argument.
Actually no. The Challenger accident was not a statistical failure of the shuttle so it should not be included. Engineers knew the boosters were being operated outside of their specifications. Once someone decides to launch outside of operating parameters all bets are off. So your past performance for at least one failure shouldn't count because you were operating outside of specs.
Sorry, you are wrong. So if I purchase a lottery ticket tonight and win, are my odds now 1 in 1 of winning the lottery if I purchase another ticket? Past performance does not dictate future performance a string of close spaced events will most likely be outweighed put future events being spaced further apart.
If I had my choice, I would much rather be debating our role in Iraq, the national economy, and patent law instead of whether the presidents cock should have been stuffed down an interns throat.
You just described buffer overflow. Some programmer thinks, "Hey nobody will ever send this function a zero terminated character array longer than 80 characters.". Designing for safety entails be able to handle an input string of any arbitrary length and handling error conditions sanely.
I'm pretty sure Marconi wasn't using *nix.
Hmmm, I find this part ".", and most certainly this part "." very offensive. Maybe you should be more sympathic in your views about ".".
They're not homeless, they're residentially displaced.
Somebody should the track the Politically Correct crowd, they're the ones to watch out for.
This is what revlolutions are for. Here in the U.S. the instructions for such are in the Declaration of Independence:
That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.
How does a nativity scene force my religion upon you?
Example: Local government alows a group to display a nativity scene in the city park, no problem. The local Druids see this display and decide "We should be able to honor the Great Oak with our display." City government says "No way, you suck with your Great Oak". At this point the local government has violated the separation of church and state by indirectly endorsing a particular religion.
a couple hundred rounds of ammo.
Couple hundred? Man, I probably have that much rolling around loose in the back of the couch.
What? I had an internet account that I paid for and was in my name when I was 15. So yes, a child CAN have their own "internet bill"
In serveral (maybe many?) states of the union, a child under 18 can not legally enter into a binding contract. This is ignored for most purposes, think of people under 18 buying cell phones and service. But either way it is the law, and it does come up occasionaly as an issue.
Hamming has no (appreciable) math.
Haven't built many antennas have you?
The math to calculate radiation patterns is mind numbing.
Oh oh oh, that's easy!
Kick 'em in the Jimmy!
If the man at 10ft has the gun pointing at your head your screwed, no question there.
Within arms reach, I'll go against the guy with gun any day. The man with the knife just has to start slashing and he will be doing damage, and I can't easily grab the knife because I'll get cut up.
The man with the gun has to actually point the barrel at me. If he's within arms reach like the other guy, you have a better chance going for the gun and keeping it pointed away from you.
It's also very hard to cause much damage with a gun without making a big racket and drawing attention. (And yes silencers are not actually silent.) It doesn't take a lot of skill to kill someone with a knife and have that operation be completely silent.
Take some courses on pistols and self defense and you'll realize the world isn't like the movies.
I am curious. Why would one need to defend one's home in the first place?
Yeah, the liberaly biased media must be making up all those stories of home invasion. That's the only way they can support gun control, look at all the loons running around with guns breaking into peoples houses.
Or, maybe your just plain wrong.
By the way, I live in a suburb of Detroit. So if you happen to live in HappyVille where no one so much as speeds, I apologize.
And pray tell me why wars are fought primarily with firearms?
First, we weren't talking about war. Second, your example with kids wasn't what we were talking about.
The scenario is someone steals an item from you, $DANGEROUS_ITEM, then purposely cause mayhem with said $DANGEROUS_ITEM.
If you were reasonably competent in securing $DANGEROUS_ITEM, but the above individual broke through locks, doors, whatever, how is it you are responsible?
This is the point being made. A dipshit leaving his firearm sitting on the endtable for his kid to take is not the example. One doesn't win an argument by presenting straw man arguments that don't pertain to the issue being discussed.
I'm glad someone else recognized this obession with a particular item.
See my comments above.
Thanks.
Nice nirvana you live in. So if someone breaks into your house while you are on vacation, and does all this stuff you will consider yourself responsible? You didn't report it, so you must be responsible.
Regardless of what people want to believe, an individual can only go so far in securing his possesions. After that that fault SHOULD lie with the individual commiting the crime. Not the owners of the implements.