It's relatively easy to use 4 engines instead of 8, since they're grouped in pairs (don't know any specifics, but I think they're attached to their pod, which itself attaches to the wing).
Modifying an airframe to get rid of the two outer engines, for instance, is anything but trivial. The Trent 900 (which I suppose is the one you mean) could be getting a bit tight on ground clearance, too.
For some messed-up reason, the Air Force has been replacing the ancient engines on pretty much every Boeing 707 derivative with CFM-56s, but have not made any significant changes to the B-52's engines...
I have a hard time believing the cost of the changes needed to convert it to 4 engines would be so high that modern engines wouldn't pay for themselves.
We could do a bombing campaign in Afghanistan do destroy the mountains the Taliban hide in. We should probably get rid of the B-52s' low-bypass turbofans, though.
No reward for guessing which sentence was serious and which wasn't.
The value of a carpet bomber is also questionable. Might as well have a few strike aircraft (think F-15E or similar) ready to quickly strike with pretty good precision.
You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. B-52s are *strictly* subsonic. They'd be ripped apart from flying anywhere near the speed of sound.
As far as I've heard, the cost in today's dollars would be ~$1,5 billion - ~$2 billion, depending on serial number (costs go down as you build more of them), which should include R&D
So Apple has once again passed off a beta version as a finished product "to be updated later". Excusing such behavior only serves to justify it, since you (and others) seemingly accept all kinds of PR nonsense.
Precisely, even my relatively ancient D-Link routers support it (though they don't advertise it much), as does pretty much everything I've bought/assembled recently
Easy. Make the option be on by default. Those who need/want to allow ping scans can just enable it, since they know how to do it anyway, since they need it.
It does not give you privacy. Assuming it does, now *insert evil entity here* only knows that occurrence X happened on your network, not on your computer. For all practical purposes, even IF NAT worked as a "privacy shield", you're still on the hook for whatever you did.
Knowledge of the network is often just as useful as knowledge of the machine behind it.
Windows 8 isn't limited to 32-bit processors in tablets. The processors themselves lack 64-bit instructions, but the support is there. Nothing is preventing anyone from sticking an x64 processor in a tablet, like they've done quite a few times (Asus EP121, Samsung Series 7 Tablet).
Apple on the other hand, is not allowing users to configure IPv6 - even if it is present and enabled, what good does it do if it can't be configured? Less features is not something you should want or tolerate. That's what pre-release builds are for.
I don't anticipate that ipv4 dies off as slowly as many people suggest. ipv4 is easy to understand, and addresses fit within the average technicians short term memory. Just try to remember ipv6 addresses, you brain will melt!
That's what DNS is for. DNS never really caught on in small private networks, but network equipment is increasingly making use of it. WHS 2011 can be accessed as "http://homeserver", most routers/APs support it as well... It's by far the least of anyone's worries
That's the point here. Why the hell would anyone want to sue someone over a postal code? You're not going to make enough money to even cover your legal bills.
Slashdot Mirror
The actual electron gun doesn't really consume that much, but it does help a bit.
On OLED, power use is proportional to the brightness of the screen (more or less, and without processing)
Shouldn't the cost of laser-guided vs. JDAM be negligible? Certainly, hybrid laser JDAMs shouldn't cost a lot more than simple JDAMs...
They'll have to modify it sooner or later, or else they won't have any engines in a few years
It's relatively easy to use 4 engines instead of 8, since they're grouped in pairs (don't know any specifics, but I think they're attached to their pod, which itself attaches to the wing).
Modifying an airframe to get rid of the two outer engines, for instance, is anything but trivial. The Trent 900 (which I suppose is the one you mean) could be getting a bit tight on ground clearance, too.
For some messed-up reason, the Air Force has been replacing the ancient engines on pretty much every Boeing 707 derivative with CFM-56s, but have not made any significant changes to the B-52's engines...
I have a hard time believing the cost of the changes needed to convert it to 4 engines would be so high that modern engines wouldn't pay for themselves.
A few seem to have weapons that can do surface to air attacks that they seems to get from their Last Russian occupation.
Yeah, when the CIA went around distributing Stingers like crazy.
We could do a bombing campaign in Afghanistan do destroy the mountains the Taliban hide in. We should probably get rid of the B-52s' low-bypass turbofans, though.
No reward for guessing which sentence was serious and which wasn't.
The exact same aircraft. Held together by cannibalised parts from B-52s destroyed because of treaties or just stored in the desert
The value of a carpet bomber is also questionable. Might as well have a few strike aircraft (think F-15E or similar) ready to quickly strike with pretty good precision.
You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. B-52s are *strictly* subsonic. They'd be ripped apart from flying anywhere near the speed of sound.
As far as I've heard, the cost in today's dollars would be ~$1,5 billion - ~$2 billion, depending on serial number (costs go down as you build more of them), which should include R&D
So Apple has once again passed off a beta version as a finished product "to be updated later". Excusing such behavior only serves to justify it, since you (and others) seemingly accept all kinds of PR nonsense.
Precisely, even my relatively ancient D-Link routers support it (though they don't advertise it much), as does pretty much everything I've bought/assembled recently
Easy. Make the option be on by default. Those who need/want to allow ping scans can just enable it, since they know how to do it anyway, since they need it.
It does not give you privacy. Assuming it does, now *insert evil entity here* only knows that occurrence X happened on your network, not on your computer. For all practical purposes, even IF NAT worked as a "privacy shield", you're still on the hook for whatever you did.
Knowledge of the network is often just as useful as knowledge of the machine behind it.
Windows 8 isn't limited to 32-bit processors in tablets. The processors themselves lack 64-bit instructions, but the support is there. Nothing is preventing anyone from sticking an x64 processor in a tablet, like they've done quite a few times (Asus EP121, Samsung Series 7 Tablet).
Apple on the other hand, is not allowing users to configure IPv6 - even if it is present and enabled, what good does it do if it can't be configured? Less features is not something you should want or tolerate. That's what pre-release builds are for.
I don't anticipate that ipv4 dies off as slowly as many people suggest. ipv4 is easy to understand, and addresses fit within the average technicians short term memory. Just try to remember ipv6 addresses, you brain will melt!
That's what DNS is for. DNS never really caught on in small private networks, but network equipment is increasingly making use of it. WHS 2011 can be accessed as "http://homeserver", most routers/APs support it as well... It's by far the least of anyone's worries
Your sarcasm detector is broken.
IPv6 allows us to finally get rid of NAT by having the router request several public addresses which are handed out to the individual computers.
The "not needed" mentality doesn't solve anything, especially because they could have just added an option to disable IPv6 instead of removing it.
You Sir, should have posted with an account.
If it's small claims, why the hell did they hire what the future defendant called (wording mine) the top IP litigation company?
That's the point here. Why the hell would anyone want to sue someone over a postal code? You're not going to make enough money to even cover your legal bills.
It doesn't matter if they have a valid complaint. They deliberately waited for the business to grow before going to court.
If they wanted to sue, they should've done it a decade ago.
Beginner's mistake. All trolls must file in the Eastern District of Texas.
To whoever thinks that vaccines are bad/cause autism/whatever, and to those who started and fuel those rumors:
Fuck you.