A stretch of highway will have far more affect on climate than an entire wind farm. I live in the eastern end of the Phoenix metropolitan area and just driving 15 miles west in the summer can increase the temperature 10 degrees just from all the concrete and black top. The temperature difference they are talking about from windmills is minor. Black top causes major increases. If you want to reduce heat don't not build windmills make roads a lighter color. It's been discussed for years but there's no political will to do it.
Rather than worrying about how to survive a crash retire planes after their projected life has been reached. A disturbing number are still in the air years and in some cases decades after their operational life has been reached. They do receive major overhauls but the airframe is the same and they do get stress fractures. Weakening structure has caused some dramatic failures including large sections of the fuselages tearing out mid flight. A large number of planes still in the air are older than most people on this web site. The fact some of these planes haven't been built in decades should be your first clue.
So moving moving their accounting department to Nevada is a noble act when it's Microsoft but an evil one when it's Apple? The whole point is all the major corporations do it and they still demand more tax breaks when they ditch most of the taxes they are required to pay through loopholes they helped write. It's insane to defend any of them when you are the one they expect to make up the difference. When they save money through tax breaks they don't hire more people they raise their own pay and benefits. Lowering the corporate tax rate will just make them richer and since we'll be expected to pay the difference, us poorer.
That Fox News "charges" Republican candidates. I've been crawling around for five decades and I've never seen such a biased news network. It's amazing how all the radical right wing reporters end up at the same network. I find it hard to call a network news department "news" when they only show one side. All news is a dim shadow of what it once was. I think people would be shocked if they saw news reports from 30+ years ago compared to what passes for news these days. I call reporters "news bunnies" these days, both the men and women. They are all pretty people that crack jokes and don't write their own copy, ever. Back in the day they were actual reporters that researched their own stories. I dare you to watch the BBC then watch CNN. What was depressing was seeing Isha Sesay join CNN. The first few months she was completely professional and just like a BBC reporter. After that they got her joking and laughing it up and now she's just like the rest of them. Apparently lame US journalism is infectious. Just look at the CNN schedule, there are a couple of hours a day to open news and the rest are news bunnies giving opinions. Cable stations may be within their rights to be bias but Fox news uses public airwaves so they should be held to a higher standard. People forget that "news" reporting is a requirement of the FCC so if they are using the public airwaves to report only one side then they need to be required to state this fact. Just tired of smug, one sided reporting being broadcast on airwaves we all own. If they want to be bias there's cable for that! I'd dearly love to see what they charge each candidate. If they charge Democrats more then they should loose their license. I'm not a Democrat I just get tired of bandwidth that could be used to benefit the public being used for political gain.
I shot a film using 24P video equipment. The DP screwed up on a couple of shots and shot them 30P. The difference was glaring and the 30P looked like crap. I'm curious to see 48 frame but I'm not convinced and it's not as simple as just jacking up all the frame rates. People keep trying to compare it to video game frame rates but it's apples and oranges. If literal was superior trust me the film industry would have switched to video many years ago. It's a lot cheaper and cheaper is seen as an extremely good thing. Shooting digitally only got practical when digital could match the look of film so film isn't inferior to video. Honestly would you be excited to see The Hobbit if it looked like Paranormal Activity? There's a trade off and after post processing it may be superior but it also may look like crap. I'm more excited by 4K than 48P. I was always a Vistavision fan and higher resolution is always a good thing. Everyone here who is declaring 48P the next great innovation have yet to see it. Don't shoot the messenger until you've actually seen the message. Everyone is taking a lot of faith that of coarse it has to be superior. It may be superior but I'd rather base my opinion on actually seeing the results than guesswork.
Wait a minute, blond haired, blue eyed muscular men aren't serious stud muffins? You mean Hitler was lying? Next thing you'll be telling me "The Producers" was a comedy and "Spring Time For Hitler" was played for laughs and he wasn't the vaguely gay character they represented him as. I mean what are you to do when your niece that you were sleeping with commits suicide? I guess after you kill a few million people, and are responsible for the deaths of tens of millions, you marry the maid and blow your brains out in a bunker. I can totally understand why the skin heads idolize him, they are morons.
What's killing Microsoft is the lack of viable products. Take away Windows and Office and Microsoft would cease to exist. Take away any two Apple products, even product lines, and you still have a viable company. Microsoft has a string of failed products while Apple's track record for the last decade has been excellent. Sure there have been a few failures but most have simply failed to perform like Apple TV and not outright disasters. The Zune may not have been a total failure but it hardly set the world afire. Xbox has done well but it wouldn't keep the company afloat if it lost Windows and Office. Windows and Office have largely hit market saturation which has lead to ten years of stock stagnation. Until Microsoft comes up with a break out product the company will continue to stagnate. I'm not an Apple fanboy it's just Microsoft has retreated to the safety of two successful product lines and rarely does anything to shake things up. The biggest shake up will be a new Xbox model but to put it into perspective what are the sales numbers on Xbox consoles? 66 million to date so maybe 1.5 billion in console sales. At best we're talking a few billion in sales not profits. Apple has 110 billion in cash on hand. Microsoft needs another Windows or Office level product to get competitive again and nothing is on the horizon.
Just look at how dangerous bacteria are getting without any intentional effort on our part. I've had to deal with MRSA myself and after four courses of antibiotics I still haven't shaken it. Engineering a bug that our natural defenses and antibiotics can't touch should be fairly easy so both accidental and intentional releases of super bugs has to be high up on the list. Historically there have been multiple examples of diseases having outbreaks that killed a large portion of the population in the last thousand years and in truth in the last hundred years. Killing all humans would be difficult since some populations are isolated but killing most humans is very achievable.
Taking a nod from their Chinese counterparts wouldn't dormitories be the next step? If workers don't leave except for vacations wouldn't it limit people leaving prototypes in restaurants and other issues that arise?
Did they take into account the costs that go into production of fertilizers and pesticides? I imagine that they take up non-zero space and that transporting them costs resources as well. Though it's hard to say how much oil a bushel of wheat is worth...
Actually the single biggest cost in modern farming are petroleum products. Most fertilizers and pesticides are petroleum based and a lot of the expense is in fuel costs.
Most seem to consider what is called free range and organic farming as something new or even new age hyppie. It's actually traditional farming as opposed to modern farming that relies heavily on chemicals and hybrids and lately GMO. The difference is traditional farming has a 12,000 year history and modern farming is coming up on a hundred years. Already modern farming is showing signs of wear. Soil is depleted meaning they more not less chemicals. Even GMO products are showing their age. Pests are becoming resistant. I question how long modern farming can last where as traditional organic farming can last indefinitely. Oil prices will go up making food more expensive. Traditional farming even uses less fuel so it can absorb the increases better. As far as how expensive organic production is I'd counter that if it's done right it can be just as cheap with little environmental impact. Free range chickens can potentially be raised without feed or with a small amount of supplimental feed grown at little or no cost by the farmer. Free range cattle also potentially need no feed and tend to be healthier so they need less antibiotics and such. Look at pig farming. I read an article on a farmer in New Hampshire raising pigs that are primarily grass fed. They are leaner and healthier and cost little to raise. The difference is you can't cram 10,000 pigs in one barn like in a factory farm you need more land.
The real issue isn't needing more land the problem countries are facing is how so we feed 10 billion people with what land is available. I just read once again that the ocean fisheries will collapse by the middle of the century and most have already. More chemicals aren't the solution fewer people is the only long term solution. As to organic verses chemical based farming, running out of oil will end that debate. It's a finite resource so it's simply a matter of time.
There's always been a massive price difference between the pro and standard version, $500 and free. The pro version looks like fun but it's way over priced. Cut it in half and I think a lot more would consider it. Google was mostly feeding off designers that are software challenged so they were able to keep the price high because they really didn't care if it sold or not since the focus was the free consumer version. I think they'll be in for an ugly surprise if they try to charge for Sketch Up the basic version so I doubt that's in the works. I'd expect fewer upgrades and more versions with the pricing being more distributed between the free standard version and hopefully a cheaper pro version.
It'd be nice to see Apple let up on the Vendetta approach Jobs took to so many problems. I'd love to see them ease up on the Adobe hatred as well. Flash may have it's issues but a good share of the web uses it so it's a pain my iDevices refuse to acknowledge it. For all his pluses Jobs had an irrational confrontational approach to companies he saw as competition or even companies that resisted doing things his way.
The more I get targeted and harassed the less likely I am to buy. I'm sick to death of being force fed advertisements that are "targeted" to me. I thoroughly understand the need for ads but the more oppressive the ads the more unlikely I am to buy so it's counterproductive. The fantasy of "forcing" people to buy is a fantasy so they need to back off the ads that attack customers and try to politely "inform" customers. Beating a customer senseless isn't going to make them more likely to buy their product!!!! I often feel like I'm in the movie "A Clockwork Orange"where they demand I watch their ads so I end up with a negative impression of their product.
Prions are primarily present in nerve tissue. The major concentration of nerve tissue is in cuts of meat like the T-Bone, which by their nature may still have traces of the spinal cord. Stick with cheaper, lesser cuts of meat (that aren't pink slime...) such as chuck, shank, and brisket, and you'll be fine.
The problem is how beef is processed. The very first cut is right down the middle of the spine spraying bits of spinal cord all over the meat. A tiny amount of prions can cause infection so avoiding certain cuts will have no affect. Avoiding organ meats that involve brain and nerve tissue isn't a bad idea but the only sure way to avoid exposure other than avoiding beef is to thoroughly cook the meat. Eating rare meat is risky. The fact that they only test downer cattle means that there is contaminated meat available for sale.
The fact they got the fat gene from a round worm gave me this mental image of a 100lb round worm covered in sheep's wool. I doubt counting those wouldn't help me get to sleep and would likely give you nightmares.
"In the other case, the ITC judge has ruled Apple violates a 3G patent, one that a German court ruled that Apple didn't violate earlier this year."
The courts aren't an ass it's just where they keep their heads. How can anyone hope to abide by copyright rules when even the courts can't sort out the mess!
No need to waste time over the cause, I think those two camps are entrenched and few will change their minds on the actual cause. The fact is the feedback loop is already starting which means it's likely self-perpetuating or soon will be. It also means the increase can be much greater than any of the projections since no one is sure how much methane can be released so most haven't factored it in to projections. It's unlikely that the climate change can be stopped but that's no reason to not limit CO2. There was always a much bigger issue that rarely gets mentioned and that's ocean acidification. Acid oceans kill fish and coral and we don't get our oxygen and food from rain forests we get most of the oxygen and a lot of our food from the oceans so killing them is a bad idea.
"Most of the participants came from "friendly" countries."
Saudi Arabia is only "friendly" if you are an oil company. It certainly isn't friendly if you are a woman or a Jew. It's funny how billions of dollars in oil can make you a friend no matter how hostile you are.
We need to start calling asteroids "terrorists" and there needs to be oil found on one. We can waste a trillion dollars fighting a handful of poorly funded religious zealots and yet we struggle to maintain even minimal funding to track objects that can easily take out a city if not most of the life on the planet. I keep hearing how rare they are yet there have been several of these high altitude bursts fairly recently and Tunguska was a little over a hundred years ago. If Tunguska sized blasts happen once in a hundred years aren't we due for one? Also how do we know? We haven't been keeping track of them for a hundred years and even historical evidence is sketchy. The planet would barely notice a city sized blast if there weren't large numbers of people below it. Also it's math not established fact. We can go 200 years with no major strikes then have a dozen in a single year then no more for a thousand years and the statistics may still call them once in a hundred year events. None of us may live to see one yet they can happen at any time. Kind of like a lottery you don't want to win.
I was a programmer for the "Earth Over Time" interactive videodisc in 1990. Produced by Digital Techniques Inc., of Burlington Massachusetts for the Interactive Video Science Consortium, the system was designed primarily for school-age children, and installed in dozens of museums worldwide including the National Geographic in Washington DC. Earth Over Time featured a touchscreen display of Continents which the user could "click and drag" to re-assemble Pangaea, the prehistoric proto-continent. This multimedia application (called an "interactive videodisc" in the days before "multimedia" was a common word) won several awards including an ITVA Golden Reel and the Best Overall Achievement Nebraska Interactive Videodisc award in 1990. I also have implementation notes from the project in my files.
What about the movie Die Hard(1988)? He used a touch display in that to find which office his wife worked in so they were using touch displays that far back.
They waste a fortune on scanners that can't see a gun if you strap it to your side then they screw up on the basics. It's like laws, they insist they need new laws when they don't enforce the existing ones. They need to actually enforce the existing rules before they add more bureaucracy that simply adds more holes to exploit.
Is it just me, or does copying a $100m spy drone that you easily captured seem like a bad direction to go?
I say it was intentional. Next they plan to "accidentally" loose an Osprey then an F-22 fighter. If deploying those doesn't bankrupt them nothing will!
Slashdot Mirror
The company also announces their newest product the Chocolate Nook.
A stretch of highway will have far more affect on climate than an entire wind farm. I live in the eastern end of the Phoenix metropolitan area and just driving 15 miles west in the summer can increase the temperature 10 degrees just from all the concrete and black top. The temperature difference they are talking about from windmills is minor. Black top causes major increases. If you want to reduce heat don't not build windmills make roads a lighter color. It's been discussed for years but there's no political will to do it.
Rather than worrying about how to survive a crash retire planes after their projected life has been reached. A disturbing number are still in the air years and in some cases decades after their operational life has been reached. They do receive major overhauls but the airframe is the same and they do get stress fractures. Weakening structure has caused some dramatic failures including large sections of the fuselages tearing out mid flight. A large number of planes still in the air are older than most people on this web site. The fact some of these planes haven't been built in decades should be your first clue.
So moving moving their accounting department to Nevada is a noble act when it's Microsoft but an evil one when it's Apple? The whole point is all the major corporations do it and they still demand more tax breaks when they ditch most of the taxes they are required to pay through loopholes they helped write. It's insane to defend any of them when you are the one they expect to make up the difference. When they save money through tax breaks they don't hire more people they raise their own pay and benefits. Lowering the corporate tax rate will just make them richer and since we'll be expected to pay the difference, us poorer.
That Fox News "charges" Republican candidates. I've been crawling around for five decades and I've never seen such a biased news network. It's amazing how all the radical right wing reporters end up at the same network. I find it hard to call a network news department "news" when they only show one side. All news is a dim shadow of what it once was. I think people would be shocked if they saw news reports from 30+ years ago compared to what passes for news these days. I call reporters "news bunnies" these days, both the men and women. They are all pretty people that crack jokes and don't write their own copy, ever. Back in the day they were actual reporters that researched their own stories. I dare you to watch the BBC then watch CNN. What was depressing was seeing Isha Sesay join CNN. The first few months she was completely professional and just like a BBC reporter. After that they got her joking and laughing it up and now she's just like the rest of them. Apparently lame US journalism is infectious. Just look at the CNN schedule, there are a couple of hours a day to open news and the rest are news bunnies giving opinions. Cable stations may be within their rights to be bias but Fox news uses public airwaves so they should be held to a higher standard. People forget that "news" reporting is a requirement of the FCC so if they are using the public airwaves to report only one side then they need to be required to state this fact. Just tired of smug, one sided reporting being broadcast on airwaves we all own. If they want to be bias there's cable for that! I'd dearly love to see what they charge each candidate. If they charge Democrats more then they should loose their license. I'm not a Democrat I just get tired of bandwidth that could be used to benefit the public being used for political gain.
I shot a film using 24P video equipment. The DP screwed up on a couple of shots and shot them 30P. The difference was glaring and the 30P looked like crap. I'm curious to see 48 frame but I'm not convinced and it's not as simple as just jacking up all the frame rates. People keep trying to compare it to video game frame rates but it's apples and oranges. If literal was superior trust me the film industry would have switched to video many years ago. It's a lot cheaper and cheaper is seen as an extremely good thing. Shooting digitally only got practical when digital could match the look of film so film isn't inferior to video. Honestly would you be excited to see The Hobbit if it looked like Paranormal Activity? There's a trade off and after post processing it may be superior but it also may look like crap. I'm more excited by 4K than 48P. I was always a Vistavision fan and higher resolution is always a good thing. Everyone here who is declaring 48P the next great innovation have yet to see it. Don't shoot the messenger until you've actually seen the message. Everyone is taking a lot of faith that of coarse it has to be superior. It may be superior but I'd rather base my opinion on actually seeing the results than guesswork.
Wait a minute, blond haired, blue eyed muscular men aren't serious stud muffins? You mean Hitler was lying? Next thing you'll be telling me "The Producers" was a comedy and "Spring Time For Hitler" was played for laughs and he wasn't the vaguely gay character they represented him as. I mean what are you to do when your niece that you were sleeping with commits suicide? I guess after you kill a few million people, and are responsible for the deaths of tens of millions, you marry the maid and blow your brains out in a bunker. I can totally understand why the skin heads idolize him, they are morons.
What's killing Microsoft is the lack of viable products. Take away Windows and Office and Microsoft would cease to exist. Take away any two Apple products, even product lines, and you still have a viable company. Microsoft has a string of failed products while Apple's track record for the last decade has been excellent. Sure there have been a few failures but most have simply failed to perform like Apple TV and not outright disasters. The Zune may not have been a total failure but it hardly set the world afire. Xbox has done well but it wouldn't keep the company afloat if it lost Windows and Office. Windows and Office have largely hit market saturation which has lead to ten years of stock stagnation. Until Microsoft comes up with a break out product the company will continue to stagnate. I'm not an Apple fanboy it's just Microsoft has retreated to the safety of two successful product lines and rarely does anything to shake things up. The biggest shake up will be a new Xbox model but to put it into perspective what are the sales numbers on Xbox consoles? 66 million to date so maybe 1.5 billion in console sales. At best we're talking a few billion in sales not profits. Apple has 110 billion in cash on hand. Microsoft needs another Windows or Office level product to get competitive again and nothing is on the horizon.
How much did they offer Facebook to take it off their hands?
Just look at how dangerous bacteria are getting without any intentional effort on our part. I've had to deal with MRSA myself and after four courses of antibiotics I still haven't shaken it. Engineering a bug that our natural defenses and antibiotics can't touch should be fairly easy so both accidental and intentional releases of super bugs has to be high up on the list. Historically there have been multiple examples of diseases having outbreaks that killed a large portion of the population in the last thousand years and in truth in the last hundred years. Killing all humans would be difficult since some populations are isolated but killing most humans is very achievable.
Taking a nod from their Chinese counterparts wouldn't dormitories be the next step? If workers don't leave except for vacations wouldn't it limit people leaving prototypes in restaurants and other issues that arise?
Did they take into account the costs that go into production of fertilizers and pesticides? I imagine that they take up non-zero space and that transporting them costs resources as well. Though it's hard to say how much oil a bushel of wheat is worth...
Actually the single biggest cost in modern farming are petroleum products. Most fertilizers and pesticides are petroleum based and a lot of the expense is in fuel costs. Most seem to consider what is called free range and organic farming as something new or even new age hyppie. It's actually traditional farming as opposed to modern farming that relies heavily on chemicals and hybrids and lately GMO. The difference is traditional farming has a 12,000 year history and modern farming is coming up on a hundred years. Already modern farming is showing signs of wear. Soil is depleted meaning they more not less chemicals. Even GMO products are showing their age. Pests are becoming resistant. I question how long modern farming can last where as traditional organic farming can last indefinitely. Oil prices will go up making food more expensive. Traditional farming even uses less fuel so it can absorb the increases better. As far as how expensive organic production is I'd counter that if it's done right it can be just as cheap with little environmental impact. Free range chickens can potentially be raised without feed or with a small amount of supplimental feed grown at little or no cost by the farmer. Free range cattle also potentially need no feed and tend to be healthier so they need less antibiotics and such. Look at pig farming. I read an article on a farmer in New Hampshire raising pigs that are primarily grass fed. They are leaner and healthier and cost little to raise. The difference is you can't cram 10,000 pigs in one barn like in a factory farm you need more land. The real issue isn't needing more land the problem countries are facing is how so we feed 10 billion people with what land is available. I just read once again that the ocean fisheries will collapse by the middle of the century and most have already. More chemicals aren't the solution fewer people is the only long term solution. As to organic verses chemical based farming, running out of oil will end that debate. It's a finite resource so it's simply a matter of time.
There's always been a massive price difference between the pro and standard version, $500 and free. The pro version looks like fun but it's way over priced. Cut it in half and I think a lot more would consider it. Google was mostly feeding off designers that are software challenged so they were able to keep the price high because they really didn't care if it sold or not since the focus was the free consumer version. I think they'll be in for an ugly surprise if they try to charge for Sketch Up the basic version so I doubt that's in the works. I'd expect fewer upgrades and more versions with the pricing being more distributed between the free standard version and hopefully a cheaper pro version.
It'd be nice to see Apple let up on the Vendetta approach Jobs took to so many problems. I'd love to see them ease up on the Adobe hatred as well. Flash may have it's issues but a good share of the web uses it so it's a pain my iDevices refuse to acknowledge it. For all his pluses Jobs had an irrational confrontational approach to companies he saw as competition or even companies that resisted doing things his way.
The more I get targeted and harassed the less likely I am to buy. I'm sick to death of being force fed advertisements that are "targeted" to me. I thoroughly understand the need for ads but the more oppressive the ads the more unlikely I am to buy so it's counterproductive. The fantasy of "forcing" people to buy is a fantasy so they need to back off the ads that attack customers and try to politely "inform" customers. Beating a customer senseless isn't going to make them more likely to buy their product!!!! I often feel like I'm in the movie "A Clockwork Orange"where they demand I watch their ads so I end up with a negative impression of their product.
Prions are primarily present in nerve tissue. The major concentration of nerve tissue is in cuts of meat like the T-Bone, which by their nature may still have traces of the spinal cord. Stick with cheaper, lesser cuts of meat (that aren't pink slime...) such as chuck, shank, and brisket, and you'll be fine.
The problem is how beef is processed. The very first cut is right down the middle of the spine spraying bits of spinal cord all over the meat. A tiny amount of prions can cause infection so avoiding certain cuts will have no affect. Avoiding organ meats that involve brain and nerve tissue isn't a bad idea but the only sure way to avoid exposure other than avoiding beef is to thoroughly cook the meat. Eating rare meat is risky. The fact that they only test downer cattle means that there is contaminated meat available for sale.
The fact they got the fat gene from a round worm gave me this mental image of a 100lb round worm covered in sheep's wool. I doubt counting those wouldn't help me get to sleep and would likely give you nightmares.
"In the other case, the ITC judge has ruled Apple violates a 3G patent, one that a German court ruled that Apple didn't violate earlier this year." The courts aren't an ass it's just where they keep their heads. How can anyone hope to abide by copyright rules when even the courts can't sort out the mess!
Victor is Bipolarized making him erratic and unpredictable. Might want to try adding lithium atoms into the mix and see if the results stabilize.
No need to waste time over the cause, I think those two camps are entrenched and few will change their minds on the actual cause. The fact is the feedback loop is already starting which means it's likely self-perpetuating or soon will be. It also means the increase can be much greater than any of the projections since no one is sure how much methane can be released so most haven't factored it in to projections. It's unlikely that the climate change can be stopped but that's no reason to not limit CO2. There was always a much bigger issue that rarely gets mentioned and that's ocean acidification. Acid oceans kill fish and coral and we don't get our oxygen and food from rain forests we get most of the oxygen and a lot of our food from the oceans so killing them is a bad idea.
"Most of the participants came from "friendly" countries." Saudi Arabia is only "friendly" if you are an oil company. It certainly isn't friendly if you are a woman or a Jew. It's funny how billions of dollars in oil can make you a friend no matter how hostile you are.
We need to start calling asteroids "terrorists" and there needs to be oil found on one. We can waste a trillion dollars fighting a handful of poorly funded religious zealots and yet we struggle to maintain even minimal funding to track objects that can easily take out a city if not most of the life on the planet. I keep hearing how rare they are yet there have been several of these high altitude bursts fairly recently and Tunguska was a little over a hundred years ago. If Tunguska sized blasts happen once in a hundred years aren't we due for one? Also how do we know? We haven't been keeping track of them for a hundred years and even historical evidence is sketchy. The planet would barely notice a city sized blast if there weren't large numbers of people below it. Also it's math not established fact. We can go 200 years with no major strikes then have a dozen in a single year then no more for a thousand years and the statistics may still call them once in a hundred year events. None of us may live to see one yet they can happen at any time. Kind of like a lottery you don't want to win.
I was a programmer for the "Earth Over Time" interactive videodisc in 1990. Produced by Digital Techniques Inc., of Burlington Massachusetts for the Interactive Video Science Consortium, the system was designed primarily for school-age children, and installed in dozens of museums worldwide including the National Geographic in Washington DC. Earth Over Time featured a touchscreen display of Continents which the user could "click and drag" to re-assemble Pangaea, the prehistoric proto-continent. This multimedia application (called an "interactive videodisc" in the days before "multimedia" was a common word) won several awards including an ITVA Golden Reel and the Best Overall Achievement Nebraska Interactive Videodisc award in 1990. I also have implementation notes from the project in my files.
What about the movie Die Hard(1988)? He used a touch display in that to find which office his wife worked in so they were using touch displays that far back.
They waste a fortune on scanners that can't see a gun if you strap it to your side then they screw up on the basics. It's like laws, they insist they need new laws when they don't enforce the existing ones. They need to actually enforce the existing rules before they add more bureaucracy that simply adds more holes to exploit.
Is it just me, or does copying a $100m spy drone that you easily captured seem like a bad direction to go?
I say it was intentional. Next they plan to "accidentally" loose an Osprey then an F-22 fighter. If deploying those doesn't bankrupt them nothing will!