I'm not sure anybody was ever fooled by the "local militiamen" who just happened to organize themselves into a cohesive force and acquire uniforms and decent military equipment in less than half a week. It was immediately obvious that they were russian soldiers - the "real" local militiamen (as in, truly a militia) look like your average hastily put together group without uniforms.
The fact alone that those soldiers are unidentified makes it a war crime (As stated in the Geneva Conventions). If this ever gets to trial (ha!) and is considered war, we already have a war crime before a single shot was fired.
Well, the guy certainly is predictable. It was 100% obvious that he was going to invade as soon as the "local militiamen" (who managed to organize themselves and acquire somewhat modern military equipment and uniforms in two days!) started showing up.
I'm venturing a guess that an aerospace engineer would've been indoctrinated to not try to propel the heaviest rocket ever launched with a pseudo-controlled nuclear-powered explosion of some sort.
I can't seem to find any sort of estimates on how much a reactor would weigh, but it's a lot. I'll stick to doing math per ton.
Let's see: Escape velocity is 11.200 m/s. Since E= 1/2*m*v^2, one kilogram would require 62,72 MJ, disregarding drag (which will not only significantly increase energy requirements, but also completely tear the reactor apart, spreading bits and pieces of it around the world).
Now, the hard part: Estimating how much one of those things weighs. I'll pull a number out of my ass, since there don't seem to be any estimates (I wonder why...).
Let's say the thing weighs at the very least some 5.000.000 kg, accounting for the building (I'd bet that it's heavier any day, but this is enough for our scenario).
That means, without air friction and in ideal circumstances, we'd need 313,6 TJ. Let's see what Wolfram Alpha has to say about it:
87ish GWh... Since at full power it generated 750 MW I'll venture a guess that it'd never generate enough power to even come close to lifting off without a nuclear explosion. At that point, we might as well grab a nuke...
74,952 kilotons of TNT... That's a smallish nuclear bomb, which means even the best case scenario requires an immense explosion. In real life, to get 313,6 useful TJ, you'd need a larger explosion, since you'd never be able to funnel all the energy so as to properly launch the thing.
That means something like heating water and using the resulting steam as propellant is out of the question - it's never be enough.
Let's recap:
You detonated a nuke under the reactor and propelled it to escape velocity. It was torn apart by aerodynamic stresses, spreading what was a relatively contained problem over a much larger area. You also added the small issue of the damage caused by the detonation, which destroys a large area and contaminates an even larger area.
OR
You added a lot of water and let it boil. Instead of a rocket, you got a cloud of radioactive steam.
If the heads are unloaded, there shouldn't be any operations going on, so no harm done (unless some genius decided that it wasn't worth it to immediately get the heads in place the moment data comes in). Note that few hard drives actually spin down, but again, if it's not spinning, there's no data flowing (unless you're really unlucky and it just started).
I'm satisfied with my two Samsung 830s, but given the tendency of most Samsung products I own to let me down, I'm not too willing to buy anything else from Samsung.
To be fair, an HDD can use its platters as a flywheel to quickly flush its (relatively tiny) buffer. I never did see proof that that was ever done, though.
Unfortunately, the ISO never defined which one is the correct way. Even if they did, if ISO 8601 is any indication, people would mostly ignore it anyway (for the record, I switched to ISO 8601-compliant dates as soon as I learned about it).
In the absence of a standard, I stick to muscle memory (10 years of intensive comma usage make it weird to use a period as the decimal seperator).
It's not excessive because it's big (like the SUVs you mentioned, or insanely large pickup trucks that rarely, if ever, haul stuff), it's excessive because it seems that very little effort went into making it fuel efficient.
Heavier than a modern design? Yup. Gas-guzzling naturally aspirated 4,6L V8? Yup, and it's still not particularly fast. 4-speed automatic? That's pitiful.
In any case, saying that 1.440W is slightly better than 1.320W is like saying that blowing real hard against the windmill will charge your phone faster.
Charging from an american husehold outlet is about the same as charging your phone with a small windmill driven by you blowing on it.
110V * 12A makes for a very pitiful 1.320W. I've seen hair dryers that sucked more power than that.
I believe they said something like 14 hours for a full charge (sure, you'd rarely need a full charge) from a 220V * 16A outlet, so you can imagine how painful the experience would be at half the voltage and a lower current.
High-power AC plugs are standardized, so that doesn't require effort beyond using existing standards. High-power DC does need standardizing. Preferably on both sides (car and charger).
Of course, my bad. I had been doing the previous calculations in millions of dollars and accidentally switched to thousands of dollars instead of dollars.
Let this be a lesson for me - always sanity check your results.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not sure anybody was ever fooled by the "local militiamen" who just happened to organize themselves into a cohesive force and acquire uniforms and decent military equipment in less than half a week. It was immediately obvious that they were russian soldiers - the "real" local militiamen (as in, truly a militia) look like your average hastily put together group without uniforms.
The fact alone that those soldiers are unidentified makes it a war crime (As stated in the Geneva Conventions). If this ever gets to trial (ha!) and is considered war, we already have a war crime before a single shot was fired.
You seem to have no idea what Schadenfreude means. It's happiness derived from others' losses.
You might want want a word like "overconfidence", or maybe recklessness.
Typically, porn-related ads are a sign of a desperate website.
Whoever your "oh so great president" is, how do you know he didn't?
What're you going to do, preemptively strike Russia causing WWIII?
Well, the guy certainly is predictable. It was 100% obvious that he was going to invade as soon as the "local militiamen" (who managed to organize themselves and acquire somewhat modern military equipment and uniforms in two days!) started showing up.
Well, at least gold-plated connectors have the guaranteed advantage of not rusting.
And how much of that is just placebo?
I'm venturing a guess that an aerospace engineer would've been indoctrinated to not try to propel the heaviest rocket ever launched with a pseudo-controlled nuclear-powered explosion of some sort.
I can't seem to find any sort of estimates on how much a reactor would weigh, but it's a lot. I'll stick to doing math per ton.
Let's see: Escape velocity is 11.200 m/s. Since E= 1/2*m*v^2, one kilogram would require 62,72 MJ, disregarding drag (which will not only significantly increase energy requirements, but also completely tear the reactor apart, spreading bits and pieces of it around the world).
Now, the hard part: Estimating how much one of those things weighs. I'll pull a number out of my ass, since there don't seem to be any estimates (I wonder why...).
Let's say the thing weighs at the very least some 5.000.000 kg, accounting for the building (I'd bet that it's heavier any day, but this is enough for our scenario).
That means, without air friction and in ideal circumstances, we'd need 313,6 TJ. Let's see what Wolfram Alpha has to say about it:
87ish GWh... Since at full power it generated 750 MW I'll venture a guess that it'd never generate enough power to even come close to lifting off without a nuclear explosion. At that point, we might as well grab a nuke...
74,952 kilotons of TNT... That's a smallish nuclear bomb, which means even the best case scenario requires an immense explosion. In real life, to get 313,6 useful TJ, you'd need a larger explosion, since you'd never be able to funnel all the energy so as to properly launch the thing.
That means something like heating water and using the resulting steam as propellant is out of the question - it's never be enough.
Let's recap:
You detonated a nuke under the reactor and propelled it to escape velocity.
It was torn apart by aerodynamic stresses, spreading what was a relatively contained problem over a much larger area.
You also added the small issue of the damage caused by the detonation, which destroys a large area and contaminates an even larger area.
OR
You added a lot of water and let it boil. Instead of a rocket, you got a cloud of radioactive steam.
I'm glad you're not an aerospace engineer. That's crazier than the "Let it melt the Earth until it reaches China" comments.
On a laptop, it may make sense to enable Windows' write cache, since there's a battery backup available. That may help you save some power.
If the heads are unloaded, there shouldn't be any operations going on, so no harm done (unless some genius decided that it wasn't worth it to immediately get the heads in place the moment data comes in). Note that few hard drives actually spin down, but again, if it's not spinning, there's no data flowing (unless you're really unlucky and it just started).
I'm not familiar with symlinks besides NTFS', but if NTFS is any indication, I'd avoid them wherever possible.
I'm satisfied with my two Samsung 830s, but given the tendency of most Samsung products I own to let me down, I'm not too willing to buy anything else from Samsung.
To be fair, an HDD can use its platters as a flywheel to quickly flush its (relatively tiny) buffer. I never did see proof that that was ever done, though.
A quality electrolytic capacitor will last a long time.
The ones used here look like Nippon Chemi-Con, rated at 105 C. They'll most likely last forever.
I seriously doubt they are binning these differently than the enterprise version.
That's crazy. All you'd need is a controller that pretends to be SCSI. I'm fairly certain SCSI supports TRIM. Same goes for AHCI (SATA).
Besides, many "PCI-e" cards are SATA controllers attached to a PCI-e - SATA bridge (often in a RAID-like format, sometimes all exposed to the OS).
Unfortunately, the ISO never defined which one is the correct way. Even if they did, if ISO 8601 is any indication, people would mostly ignore it anyway (for the record, I switched to ISO 8601-compliant dates as soon as I learned about it).
In the absence of a standard, I stick to muscle memory (10 years of intensive comma usage make it weird to use a period as the decimal seperator).
It's not excessive because it's big (like the SUVs you mentioned, or insanely large pickup trucks that rarely, if ever, haul stuff), it's excessive because it seems that very little effort went into making it fuel efficient.
Heavier than a modern design? Yup.
Gas-guzzling naturally aspirated 4,6L V8? Yup, and it's still not particularly fast.
4-speed automatic? That's pitiful.
I'm getting 220V, but that's beside the point.
In any case, saying that 1.440W is slightly better than 1.320W is like saying that blowing real hard against the windmill will charge your phone faster.
You hear that sound over your head? It means you missed the joke.
Charging from an american husehold outlet is about the same as charging your phone with a small windmill driven by you blowing on it.
110V * 12A makes for a very pitiful 1.320W. I've seen hair dryers that sucked more power than that.
I believe they said something like 14 hours for a full charge (sure, you'd rarely need a full charge) from a 220V * 16A outlet, so you can imagine how painful the experience would be at half the voltage and a lower current.
High-power AC plugs are standardized, so that doesn't require effort beyond using existing standards.
High-power DC does need standardizing. Preferably on both sides (car and charger).
The gas used by a Grand Marquis/Crown Vic/Town Car in a full day's drive might be enough to power a neighborhood...
That said, it's one of the most comfortable symbols of American excess I've seen.
It's "radionuclides". You've been watching too much crap Sci-Fi.
Of course, my bad. I had been doing the previous calculations in millions of dollars and accidentally switched to thousands of dollars instead of dollars.
Let this be a lesson for me - always sanity check your results.