I've heard the similar comments about solar cells, and if you think about it, it's bs. I can buy a solar panel that produces 250W for $400. Figure an average of 8hrs a day so that's about 2000kWh/day. Figure that it costs about $0.12/kWh from the power company, so $0.24/day*365 = $87/year. Typical estimates for solar panel lifetime is 20 years, so that far exceeds the amount paid for the panel. Now, keep in mind that the cells are just part of the cost of the panel, there's the frame, glass, and other parts, so say that the solar cells cost $200. Probably high; the $400 quoted is from Home Depot--not the cheapest source. Now, do you really think that if it took more than $200 worth of energy to make the solar cells for that panel, the company making the cells would have to charge more? Yes, my estimates are pretty rough, but I think I'm in the ballpark here. There are, of course, a lot of variables such as latitude, reduced output due to cloud cover, lower efficiency due to average angel of incident during the day, etcetera. If someone has better estimates, feel free to comment.
The model in the picture doesn't even have the classic Spitfire elliptical wing. It's one of the later models with clipped wingtips. Wikipedia has a better image: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supermarine_Spitfire
The 747 also carries more passengers than most aircraft. The Cessna 172 only carries one or two people typically, so by your standards, it may well have better stats. Fatalities per passenger mile would probably be a better measurement.
The DC-10 first flew just a few months after the 747 and also has outward-opening doors. The DC-10 had several major accidents, including one involving the door blowing out, killing all on board. Don't just blame Boeing.
Taxes went down from the time Regan took office until the Bush tax cuts, during all administrations. The rates went down for the poor and middle class, but decreased the most for the upper tax bracket--from about 69% to about 35%. Spending didn't decrease. The percentage of the Federal Government's revenue from businesses has also been steadily going down in the last few decades, the 35% business marginal rate not withstanding. But now, according to the far right, we have a spending problem, not a revenue problem. Go figure.
More likely, GM's contract with HP included a section that kept them from hiring HP's employees that were doing the work and then terminating the contract. GM was in the process of terminating the contract. Most contracts like that will have methods for the parties to terminate early. It all depends upon how the contract was being terminated and what, if any, of the hiring restrictions in the contract could still be enforced. I doubt that most of the employees had contracts with HP, but as usual, the OP isn't clear on that point.
Company A sells a product.
Company B makes a better product, using parts purchased from company A.
Company A closely copies company B's product, as companies have done since the beginning of time.
Company B files suit against Company A for infringement.
Company B divorces all business from company A, as companies have done since the beginning of time.
Company A's parts business is just fine, since company B isn't that much of their business.
Nobody is saying Samsung is a victim of anything, except perhaps bad patents and jury foremen. And no, I use Windows, Linux, Mac OS, and Android. It's not just Android fanbois who think Samsung got a bad deal in the US lawsuit. Apple's move to TSMC isn't a big deal for them, however.
The FAA was started with a safety mandate back when most people would rather play Russian roulette than get on board an airplane. Back then, there was no compromise. They are now faced with deregulated airlines, where cutting costs is more important than safety. Case in point is that aircraft maintenance is increasing done overseas, where FAA inspectors aren't present. The FAA has also been hit with smaller budgets, resulting in fewer inspectors. This could be a case where the FAA is focusing on issues that are trivial, safety wise, compared to other problems, simply because they can't go after the bigger ones. I suspect that there will be a maintenance-related accident in the next few years, and the blow back from that will drown out consumer complaints about PEDs.
The document in the link you provided must be different from the one you read. It didn't take me too long to find an incident that showed interference from a phone. Unless you are part of the "correlation does not imply causation" crowd.
Yet we know they're not actually worried about this - because I've yet to see anyone fined, removed from a flight, arrested, or put on a watch list for dicking about with their cell phones during take off or landing.
Technically, I think he was using an iPad, and they were still on the tarmac, but how about Alec Baldwin?
I'd agree if it weren't for 3G connectivity. Most of the comments here don't differentiate between, say, my wristwatch with an oscillator running at 32.768kHz, an Android tablet w/o 3/4G connectivity and no WiFi connection, and an iPhone trying to connect with the closest cell tower. We're talking orders of magnitude differences in signal strength, and different parts of the electromagnetic spectrum. A pilot using an iPad with no cellular activity and with WiFi turned off is a lot different than dozens of cellular and WiFi radios in the cabin running at various power levels.
Another point is that if my Android tablet interferes with my car radio, no one gets hurt. That may not be the case for interference with avionics. In a worse case scenario, you can end up with a lot of dead people. Higher risk requires greater caution.
Insurance companies aren't in the business of losing money. Increase premium costs too much if you go with SpaceX and nobody will use them. And turn-around time to replace a lost satellite also means loss of income and opportunity.
It won't even take that long. Just one failure on the next few launches, dropping a $100M+ commercial satellite, and SpaceX could be toast in that market. For ISS resupply, they might survive a low but non-zero failure rate. The assumption there is that, as long as they can get a replacement launch up before consumable levels become critical, the replacement cost of the payload would be more like pocket change.
And what are the chances that the TSA will now require current and future employees to sign a contract stating that they can never divulge the inner workings of the TSA? A transparent government organization such as the TSA will, of course, want to keep its stellar reputation intact.
Just have them practice on the outside of the ship, firing in the opposite direction of travel, so it'll speed up the ship. Until turnaround for deceleration, of course.
That's call right to privacy. Privacy laws prevent colleges, the IRS, and government records offices from publishing that data for ANYONE. The individual has the right to publish that information himself, if he so desires. Presidents and presidential candidates have the right to publish their private information, and rarely exercise it.
This reminds me of the early PC days, where one hardware manufacturer would look like they would be set to dominate for awhile, then crash and burn, another manufacturer would look like a winner, rinse and repeat. Samsung is looking like the 800 pound gorilla right now, but things could, and probably will, change quickly.
Slashdot Mirror
I've heard the similar comments about solar cells, and if you think about it, it's bs. I can buy a solar panel that produces 250W for $400. Figure an average of 8hrs a day so that's about 2000kWh/day. Figure that it costs about $0.12/kWh from the power company, so $0.24/day*365 = $87/year. Typical estimates for solar panel lifetime is 20 years, so that far exceeds the amount paid for the panel. Now, keep in mind that the cells are just part of the cost of the panel, there's the frame, glass, and other parts, so say that the solar cells cost $200. Probably high; the $400 quoted is from Home Depot--not the cheapest source. Now, do you really think that if it took more than $200 worth of energy to make the solar cells for that panel, the company making the cells would have to charge more? Yes, my estimates are pretty rough, but I think I'm in the ballpark here. There are, of course, a lot of variables such as latitude, reduced output due to cloud cover, lower efficiency due to average angel of incident during the day, etcetera. If someone has better estimates, feel free to comment.
The model in the picture doesn't even have the classic Spitfire elliptical wing. It's one of the later models with clipped wingtips. Wikipedia has a better image: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supermarine_Spitfire
The 747 also carries more passengers than most aircraft. The Cessna 172 only carries one or two people typically, so by your standards, it may well have better stats. Fatalities per passenger mile would probably be a better measurement.
The DC-10 first flew just a few months after the 747 and also has outward-opening doors. The DC-10 had several major accidents, including one involving the door blowing out, killing all on board. Don't just blame Boeing.
I know this is a composite image, but there's some seriously crappy editing in the upper-left quadrant of the image. Still, cool stuff.
Taxes went down from the time Regan took office until the Bush tax cuts, during all administrations. The rates went down for the poor and middle class, but decreased the most for the upper tax bracket--from about 69% to about 35%. Spending didn't decrease. The percentage of the Federal Government's revenue from businesses has also been steadily going down in the last few decades, the 35% business marginal rate not withstanding. But now, according to the far right, we have a spending problem, not a revenue problem. Go figure.
More likely, GM's contract with HP included a section that kept them from hiring HP's employees that were doing the work and then terminating the contract. GM was in the process of terminating the contract. Most contracts like that will have methods for the parties to terminate early. It all depends upon how the contract was being terminated and what, if any, of the hiring restrictions in the contract could still be enforced. I doubt that most of the employees had contracts with HP, but as usual, the OP isn't clear on that point.
Company A sells a product.
Company B makes a better product, using parts purchased from company A.
Company A closely copies company B's product, as companies have done since the beginning of time.
Company B files suit against Company A for infringement.
Company B divorces all business from company A, as companies have done since the beginning of time.
Company A's parts business is just fine, since company B isn't that much of their business.
Nobody is saying Samsung is a victim of anything, except perhaps bad patents and jury foremen. And no, I use Windows, Linux, Mac OS, and Android. It's not just Android fanbois who think Samsung got a bad deal in the US lawsuit. Apple's move to TSMC isn't a big deal for them, however.
Wow, we need this right now to feed all of our livestock. Maximize profits!
The FAA was started with a safety mandate back when most people would rather play Russian roulette than get on board an airplane. Back then, there was no compromise. They are now faced with deregulated airlines, where cutting costs is more important than safety. Case in point is that aircraft maintenance is increasing done overseas, where FAA inspectors aren't present. The FAA has also been hit with smaller budgets, resulting in fewer inspectors. This could be a case where the FAA is focusing on issues that are trivial, safety wise, compared to other problems, simply because they can't go after the bigger ones. I suspect that there will be a maintenance-related accident in the next few years, and the blow back from that will drown out consumer complaints about PEDs.
The document in the link you provided must be different from the one you read. It didn't take me too long to find an incident that showed interference from a phone. Unless you are part of the "correlation does not imply causation" crowd.
Yet we know they're not actually worried about this - because I've yet to see anyone fined, removed from a flight, arrested, or put on a watch list for dicking about with their cell phones during take off or landing.
Technically, I think he was using an iPad, and they were still on the tarmac, but how about Alec Baldwin?
The existence and popularity of skiing and hunting prove that not all Americans weigh safety as highly as the FAA does.
So everyone boarding an airplane must assume the safety risks as defined by the person who values their life the least?
The FAA has a distinctly different reputation, M.O., and set of priorities then, say, the FCC.
Is there an FBB which is somewhere in between the two?
Face Book Bureau?
I'd agree if it weren't for 3G connectivity. Most of the comments here don't differentiate between, say, my wristwatch with an oscillator running at 32.768kHz, an Android tablet w/o 3/4G connectivity and no WiFi connection, and an iPhone trying to connect with the closest cell tower. We're talking orders of magnitude differences in signal strength, and different parts of the electromagnetic spectrum. A pilot using an iPad with no cellular activity and with WiFi turned off is a lot different than dozens of cellular and WiFi radios in the cabin running at various power levels.
Another point is that if my Android tablet interferes with my car radio, no one gets hurt. That may not be the case for interference with avionics. In a worse case scenario, you can end up with a lot of dead people. Higher risk requires greater caution.
Insurance companies aren't in the business of losing money. Increase premium costs too much if you go with SpaceX and nobody will use them. And turn-around time to replace a lost satellite also means loss of income and opportunity.
The engine failure cause the loss of the secondary payload only because NASA wouldn't let SpaceX restart the engines due to ISS safety concerns.
It won't even take that long. Just one failure on the next few launches, dropping a $100M+ commercial satellite, and SpaceX could be toast in that market. For ISS resupply, they might survive a low but non-zero failure rate. The assumption there is that, as long as they can get a replacement launch up before consumable levels become critical, the replacement cost of the payload would be more like pocket change.
We live in the future, why don't our tools enforce these standards automagically?
They would, but they are held up in code review.
And what are the chances that the TSA will now require current and future employees to sign a contract stating that they can never divulge the inner workings of the TSA? A transparent government organization such as the TSA will, of course, want to keep its stellar reputation intact.
Easy, free ammo.
Just have them practice on the outside of the ship, firing in the opposite direction of travel, so it'll speed up the ship. Until turnaround for deceleration, of course.
That's call right to privacy. Privacy laws prevent colleges, the IRS, and government records offices from publishing that data for ANYONE. The individual has the right to publish that information himself, if he so desires. Presidents and presidential candidates have the right to publish their private information, and rarely exercise it.
Sinister is seeking power over other men at the end of a gun, and that is the province of the state and no one else.
Sinister is seeking power over other men with legislators, bought and paid for. No guns needed.
This reminds me of the early PC days, where one hardware manufacturer would look like they would be set to dominate for awhile, then crash and burn, another manufacturer would look like a winner, rinse and repeat. Samsung is looking like the 800 pound gorilla right now, but things could, and probably will, change quickly.
They can already do 1) and 2) is not going to happen, its just too loaded with pitfalls. Dave was going for his mother's funeral, whoops, lawsuit.
Except the TOS no doubt says you must submit to binding arbitration, so good luck with that.