Downward velocity component (affects the trapped/confined pressure differential), altitude of wing (affects confined pressure differential, and the formation of wingtip vortices (and their disuroption) which is part of GE), and wing dimensions/properties (wingspan, chord, airfoil shape, affects downward velocity and the confinement of the differential). and indirectly weight of the aircraft (not because it causes ground effect, but because it determines the effectiveness of it as the force opposing lift)
Give them 10k more years and they'll manage to do it with femtocell lasers just fine. Or 50k years, it really doesn't matter,
Assuming they even know to look in the first place, or even want to. It's not just the ability to restore the knowledge, it's also the inclination to even do so, and the benefit of doing so.
First "Benefit": If they have to wait til they have the same tech we do now, then there isn't even any benefit, because they ALREADY have the same tech we do now. Thus there is no gain, there is no "knowledge to restore" becaue they already have the same knowledge. This is a fundamental problem with using the highest of the high tech to store the knowledge of some arbitrary "today". All they "gain" is a history book, and proof we existed, but OUR knowledge provides no actual benefit. Compared to finding a book or computer, or other "old tech", storing our knowledge that would allow leapfrogging of natural technological progress. Note that "they" will decode our knowledge regardless, because of the chance we knight speed their develpoment; but it's up to us to ensure that our recorded knowledge actually allows it to happen.
Second, Inclination: This ties into the basis of the benefit concept: if they have to wait til they have the same leading edge tech as us, how will they even know that this oddly shaded glass discs are anything more than frisbees, or dinner plates, or art, let alone the sum of our civilization's knowledge? How will they even know to look? (Philisophically, how would we even know to look ourselves, at crystals buried in "rock" hundreds of thousands of years old or more?) This is largely a engineering/design problem, and somewhat easily surmountable, but still something to consider. Superman quartz crystals just look like bigger than average quartz crystals, and we can't garuntee the why or how of such a thing would be found. So it needs to really stick out and scream "I am special".
So this tech is good (not saying its not): unlike books (exmaple) it doesnt require a lot of special precuations to survive a really long time. But, it's still not the end of the story. And if we keep developing better and better long term storage, always upgrading to the "best of the best" to store our knowledge wont necessarily provide a net benefit to the future society, by allowing the hypotehtical future society to easily leapfrog their natural technological developement.
Are they? Do you actually have any inside knowledge of the NSA and what they do, beyond what you read int eh papers and hear on/. ? Like any fed agency it's largely ordinary civil service just doing a day to day job to feed their family. Most of them are ordinary people no more deserving of your hate (and yes, it is bigoted hate, oriented around their job instead of race or creed) than anyone else. Most of them are probably doing harmless innocuous work, or actually tracing workable intelligence leads towards the bad guys. the few actually involved in "the bad stuff" we all hate are probably the same ordinary civil service workers who just "doing their job" and give no more thought to the moral rightness of what theyre doing than a Chevy worker does as he tightens the same nut 50k times a day as the line moves past.
Your unreasonably unlimited hate and vitriol only helps fuel the problem. Beleive it or not the intelligence community does serve a useful purpose, and the scandal is only one facet of them.
Better to narrow your focus only towards the ones actually responsible, the ones in charge, politician and appointee alike, who decided they needed to violate our rights to "keep us safe". Hating them all is unreasonable and no different than any other unreasonable guilt-by-association based hatred through history.
i forgot for a second there that this is slashdot, and logic and reason do not apply when talking about copyrights, and supporting anything other than free software and content for everyone is automatically equated with supporting the MPAA (which i dont) and trolling.
not an expert on tectonics and plates and stuff...
but shouldnt hte plate still be bearing the weight of the ice even if its floating on teh ocean? i mean after all, the plate is bearing the weight of the ocean too,and as long as the calved ice is still above the relevant plate, that plate should be bearing the ice's weight too, right?
i realize it maybe a little more complex than a textbook 2d example, because at the scale we're talking about the plates and ice and ocean are not planar, but rather curved, and the gravitational forces arent perfectly parallel to each other, but perpendicular to the curvature of the earth. but the core concept is still there.
the only thing i can think of is it isnt so much the weight of the ice that is no longer being borne by the plate, but the portion (not all) of the weight of the displaced water as it redistributes to "equilibrium".
Or are you trying to apply corrupt US law onto Sweden ?
Actually quite a few countries have agreements where laws are either shared or similar in both nations. One of hte perks of being in the UN/EU and having treaties. (note that in teh abstract normalization of laws acros borders is a good thing)
we dont pay 50$ for concerts because of pirating. we pay 50$ for concerts because its how the artists really make their money, because the RIAA's members dont pay jack to the artists they sign.
as long as its theirs to do with as they please, there is no wrong committed, even if they sink it to the bottom of the ocean and never even show it to the public, let alone refuse to make localized copies.
Beacuse some sub sites not only give subs, but also the movie with the subs already added in. Convenient, yes. But also technically redistributing a copyrighted work. I know, its more convenient and often a better translation (if you pick and choose). And if the copyright holder was smart, he'd even contract it out to these guys in the first place. But no one ever said people had to be smart in teh exercising of their rights, including copyrights. (much like if they were smart, they'd stop fighting Netflix and digital distribution so much)
Nothing he said was trolling. Nothing he said was BS. Nothing he said was pro-RIAA/MPAA.
A producer, or creator or author or whatever you want to call him, has a fundamental right to profit off his created work (his "goods and services") the same as any other. Merely supporting that right is not the same as supporting the MPAA, nor is it BS.
This. Boycotting the movie over someone only tangentally (sp?) attached to it (considering the myriad huge departures fromt he book) is silly. he gets almost nothing, if anything, of your dollars. It's also hypocritical if you dont also boycott every other movie over someones views, and i garuntee you it applies to -EVERY- movie.
that said, like most book/movie projects, if I see it, I'll try...very hard...to judge it on its own merits and not on the departures from the book. That said, a lot of the changes basically gut the story and its impact, so i'm not exactly optimistic.
The NSA grew out of a military agency, and still has ranking leaders who are ranking military. But it's more civilian than not.
There are only 3 parts of DoD that are unquestionably "military", and that is the actual 3 branches of the military: Air Force, Army, and Navy (which includes Marines*). 4 if you include the Joint Chiefs since they're technically it's own heading in the organizational brackdown. The rest are are civilian sub-departments of the DoD, even though they have military personal assigned and even in charge of them, and interface heavility with the branches, but they are civilian: DARPA, DoD security forces, DFAS, SecDef, and the NSA.
*(Coast Guard has been moved under DHS and is not longer military, even though it's still a "uniformed service"...there are a couple other government "uniformed services" that aren't military, NOAA has one even)
Its part of DoD, but technically not part of the military anymore. The military (essentially government sub-departments for this discussion) fall under the DoD, but the DoD itself is not 100% military. that's the key distinction. NSA grew out of a military interservice joint agency, and thus has retained its connection to the DoD and still has military ranking members (and facilities on certain bases around the world), but by and large its more civilian than not.
were the pilots in the military? no. the fact many pilots were ex-military is immaterial. so are most Astronauts, and a whole ton of other federal employees. but simple federal law prevents any active military personel from holding any government position while still int eh military. its a simple matter of basic law. you can ignore it all you want, or handwave it away as part of the conspiracy, but that's how it is.
were the planes owned by the military? again, no. the Air Force created the original design request, BUT the Air Force did not operate the U-2 until after the CIA stopped (the Air Force actually REJECTED the U2 proposal they themselves solicited, and didnt regain interest until after the CIA proved how useful it was). meaning the aircraft were bought by the CIA, NOT the military. The same goes for the Lockheed A-12; the Air Force never operated the A-12, they operated its similar, but larger, successor, the SR-71, years after the CIA stopped.
and no, the budgets were not and are not the same. the CIA has its own pot of money, coming from the "intelligence budget", which is seperate from the defense budget, and which also pays for the other 15 intelligence agencies, military and civilian, seperated into two categorie: national intellegince (civilian) and millitary (duh).
no part of anything you said is any way factual. There were not military. Your posts in this thread are not insightful. You are a troll.
So therefor the DOJ, the DOE (both of them), State Department, DHS, FBI, Secret Service, DOT, and DOTT, and all other parts of the Executive Branch, including the Library of Congress....are all under military control?
So uh...which service is the President part of? What rank is he? Oh he's not?
Just because the military falls under the Executive branch same as the other doesnt mean the other is "under military control". That logic could be turned around to say because the President is "chief diplomat" the entire EB is under State Department control...or as ultimate controller of the DoJ the military answers to the cops..and on and on.
also, if you think Obama is so godawful bad...please tell me what you thought of Bush, considering Obama let stand most of Bush's policies, even after campaigning on a platform of "change", and even expanded many of them (eg: the drone strikes, and illegal immigrant deportations) ?
The phrase "Meet the new boss, same as the old boss" is quite apt.
LA had a republican from 1993 to 2001. NY had Guiliani.
But let's not let facts get in the way...(ok im being pedantic)
But also you have to consider....if the places are so godawful bad...why do they keep electing Dems, even in Texas? And continue to grow in population and economy (except Detroit...that place if fubar)? Maybe you should tone down the partisan reality blinders.
so we should regulate all businesses out of business? its easy to pass a law ("there oughta be a law!!") but these laws do have a cost. you can raise prices, but only so much of that cost can be passed onto consumers overnight. raise prices too much too fast and consumers go somewhere else.
believe it or not, most business owners dont piss on their employees. but neither do they run their companies as jobs programs. they're in it to make a buck (shocker!), and if they go out of business, no one is happy. they're not all saints, but theyre not all satan either.
that said, there are plenty of companies that skirt the law through various tricks (re: Walmart working people just under the limit that would require providing benefits). but generally speaking, employers are required to pay OT. why it's important to know the laws for your area.
Lastly, your employer isn't required to pay you overtime or give you comp time.
Actually that's not true.
Federal law (FLSA) requires overtime pay unless covered by certain exemptions. The exemptions are governed by 3 legal tests, which must all be met in order to fall under the exemption. One exemption is for persons engaged in fishing (since the boat can be out for longer than 8 hours, even days at a time), or similar employees who's job doesnt fit the idea of a normal 8 hour shift (military personel fall under this too).
Additionally state laws have various things to say as well, and their own codified exemptions (since the state level often knows more about local/regional work), which do not supercede the FLSA, but merely augment it. IE, if either FLSA or state law require it, you gotta pay it. Example (minus exemptions): In OK and GA, any hours over 40 in a week is overtime and must be paid. In Tennessee and few other states, it's a bit different, in that any hours over 8 in a day is overtime (which gets interesting for some fire departments: guy friend of mine works a 3 on, 4 off shift. 72 hours of work a week, with 48 of it being overtime....slightly shady, but nice if you can get it)
Point is: minus the exemptions, employees indeed ARE required to pay overtime.
Slashdot Mirror
Downward velocity component (affects the trapped/confined pressure differential), altitude of wing (affects confined pressure differential, and the formation of wingtip vortices (and their disuroption) which is part of GE), and wing dimensions/properties (wingspan, chord, airfoil shape, affects downward velocity and the confinement of the differential). and indirectly weight of the aircraft (not because it causes ground effect, but because it determines the effectiveness of it as the force opposing lift)
that's better than the one for Everest at least then. the image that keeps coming to mind is:
-"Belay on!"
-"Hold on, I'm tweeting our status"
Mod up for reference.
Give them 10k more years and they'll manage to do it with femtocell lasers just fine. Or 50k years, it really doesn't matter,
Assuming they even know to look in the first place, or even want to.
It's not just the ability to restore the knowledge, it's also the inclination to even do so, and the benefit of doing so.
First "Benefit": If they have to wait til they have the same tech we do now, then there isn't even any benefit, because they ALREADY have the same tech we do now. Thus there is no gain, there is no "knowledge to restore" becaue they already have the same knowledge. This is a fundamental problem with using the highest of the high tech to store the knowledge of some arbitrary "today". All they "gain" is a history book, and proof we existed, but OUR knowledge provides no actual benefit. Compared to finding a book or computer, or other "old tech", storing our knowledge that would allow leapfrogging of natural technological progress. Note that "they" will decode our knowledge regardless, because of the chance we knight speed their develpoment; but it's up to us to ensure that our recorded knowledge actually allows it to happen.
Second, Inclination: This ties into the basis of the benefit concept: if they have to wait til they have the same leading edge tech as us, how will they even know that this oddly shaded glass discs are anything more than frisbees, or dinner plates, or art, let alone the sum of our civilization's knowledge? How will they even know to look? (Philisophically, how would we even know to look ourselves, at crystals buried in "rock" hundreds of thousands of years old or more?) This is largely a engineering/design problem, and somewhat easily surmountable, but still something to consider. Superman quartz crystals just look like bigger than average quartz crystals, and we can't garuntee the why or how of such a thing would be found. So it needs to really stick out and scream "I am special".
So this tech is good (not saying its not): unlike books (exmaple) it doesnt require a lot of special precuations to survive a really long time. But, it's still not the end of the story. And if we keep developing better and better long term storage, always upgrading to the "best of the best" to store our knowledge wont necessarily provide a net benefit to the future society, by allowing the hypotehtical future society to easily leapfrog their natural technological developement.
Are they? Do you actually have any inside knowledge of the NSA and what they do, beyond what you read int eh papers and hear on /. ? Like any fed agency it's largely ordinary civil service just doing a day to day job to feed their family. Most of them are ordinary people no more deserving of your hate (and yes, it is bigoted hate, oriented around their job instead of race or creed) than anyone else. Most of them are probably doing harmless innocuous work, or actually tracing workable intelligence leads towards the bad guys. the few actually involved in "the bad stuff" we all hate are probably the same ordinary civil service workers who just "doing their job" and give no more thought to the moral rightness of what theyre doing than a Chevy worker does as he tightens the same nut 50k times a day as the line moves past.
Your unreasonably unlimited hate and vitriol only helps fuel the problem.
Beleive it or not the intelligence community does serve a useful purpose, and the scandal is only one facet of them.
Better to narrow your focus only towards the ones actually responsible, the ones in charge, politician and appointee alike, who decided they needed to violate our rights to "keep us safe". Hating them all is unreasonable and no different than any other unreasonable guilt-by-association based hatred through history.
i forgot for a second there that this is slashdot, and logic and reason do not apply when talking about copyrights, and supporting anything other than free software and content for everyone is automatically equated with supporting the MPAA (which i dont) and trolling.
not an expert on tectonics and plates and stuff...
but shouldnt hte plate still be bearing the weight of the ice even if its floating on teh ocean?
i mean after all, the plate is bearing the weight of the ocean too,and as long as the calved ice is still above the relevant plate, that plate should be bearing the ice's weight too, right?
i realize it maybe a little more complex than a textbook 2d example, because at the scale we're talking about the plates and ice and ocean are not planar, but rather curved, and the gravitational forces arent perfectly parallel to each other, but perpendicular to the curvature of the earth. but the core concept is still there.
the only thing i can think of is it isnt so much the weight of the ice that is no longer being borne by the plate, but the portion (not all) of the weight of the displaced water as it redistributes to "equilibrium".
Because allowing creators and owners of things to profit frm them is EVIL and a BAD THING.
PROFIT IS EVIL!
Or are you trying to apply corrupt US law onto Sweden ?
Actually quite a few countries have agreements where laws are either shared or similar in both nations. One of hte perks of being in the UN/EU and having treaties. (note that in teh abstract normalization of laws acros borders is a good thing)
we dont pay 50$ for concerts because of pirating.
we pay 50$ for concerts because its how the artists really make their money, because the RIAA's members dont pay jack to the artists they sign.
as long as its theirs to do with as they please, there is no wrong committed, even if they sink it to the bottom of the ocean and never even show it to the public, let alone refuse to make localized copies.
Beacuse some sub sites not only give subs, but also the movie with the subs already added in. Convenient, yes. But also technically redistributing a copyrighted work. I know, its more convenient and often a better translation (if you pick and choose). And if the copyright holder was smart, he'd even contract it out to these guys in the first place. But no one ever said people had to be smart in teh exercising of their rights, including copyrights. (much like if they were smart, they'd stop fighting Netflix and digital distribution so much)
Nothing he said was trolling.
Nothing he said was BS.
Nothing he said was pro-RIAA/MPAA.
A producer, or creator or author or whatever you want to call him, has a fundamental right to profit off his created work (his "goods and services") the same as any other. Merely supporting that right is not the same as supporting the MPAA, nor is it BS.
Your analysis and your data is incorrect.
This.
Boycotting the movie over someone only tangentally (sp?) attached to it (considering the myriad huge departures fromt he book) is silly. he gets almost nothing, if anything, of your dollars. It's also hypocritical if you dont also boycott every other movie over someones views, and i garuntee you it applies to -EVERY- movie.
that said, like most book/movie projects, if I see it, I'll try...very hard...to judge it on its own merits and not on the departures from the book. That said, a lot of the changes basically gut the story and its impact, so i'm not exactly optimistic.
No.
Military = DoD,
but DoD != Military.
The NSA grew out of a military agency, and still has ranking leaders who are ranking military. But it's more civilian than not.
There are only 3 parts of DoD that are unquestionably "military", and that is the actual 3 branches of the military: Air Force, Army, and Navy (which includes Marines*). 4 if you include the Joint Chiefs since they're technically it's own heading in the organizational brackdown. The rest are are civilian sub-departments of the DoD, even though they have military personal assigned and even in charge of them, and interface heavility with the branches, but they are civilian: DARPA, DoD security forces, DFAS, SecDef, and the NSA.
*(Coast Guard has been moved under DHS and is not longer military, even though it's still a "uniformed service"...there are a couple other government "uniformed services" that aren't military, NOAA has one even)
Its part of DoD, but technically not part of the military anymore. The military (essentially government sub-departments for this discussion) fall under the DoD, but the DoD itself is not 100% military. that's the key distinction. NSA grew out of a military interservice joint agency, and thus has retained its connection to the DoD and still has military ranking members (and facilities on certain bases around the world), but by and large its more civilian than not.
were the pilots in the military? no.
the fact many pilots were ex-military is immaterial. so are most Astronauts, and a whole ton of other federal employees. but simple federal law prevents any active military personel from holding any government position while still int eh military. its a simple matter of basic law. you can ignore it all you want, or handwave it away as part of the conspiracy, but that's how it is.
were the planes owned by the military? again, no.
the Air Force created the original design request, BUT the Air Force did not operate the U-2 until after the CIA stopped (the Air Force actually REJECTED the U2 proposal they themselves solicited, and didnt regain interest until after the CIA proved how useful it was). meaning the aircraft were bought by the CIA, NOT the military. The same goes for the Lockheed A-12; the Air Force never operated the A-12, they operated its similar, but larger, successor, the SR-71, years after the CIA stopped.
and no, the budgets were not and are not the same. the CIA has its own pot of money, coming from the "intelligence budget", which is seperate from the defense budget, and which also pays for the other 15 intelligence agencies, military and civilian, seperated into two categorie: national intellegince (civilian) and millitary (duh).
no part of anything you said is any way factual.
There were not military.
Your posts in this thread are not insightful.
You are a troll.
So therefor the DOJ, the DOE (both of them), State Department, DHS, FBI, Secret Service, DOT, and DOTT, and all other parts of the Executive Branch, including the Library of Congress....are all under military control?
So uh...which service is the President part of? What rank is he?
Oh he's not?
Just because the military falls under the Executive branch same as the other doesnt mean the other is "under military control". That logic could be turned around to say because the President is "chief diplomat" the entire EB is under State Department control...or as ultimate controller of the DoJ the military answers to the cops..and on and on.
Bloody ignorant troll.
how are you so consistantly ignorant?
also, if you think Obama is so godawful bad...please tell me what you thought of Bush, considering Obama let stand most of Bush's policies, even after campaigning on a platform of "change", and even expanded many of them (eg: the drone strikes, and illegal immigrant deportations) ?
The phrase "Meet the new boss, same as the old boss" is quite apt.
LA had a republican from 1993 to 2001.
NY had Guiliani.
But let's not let facts get in the way...(ok im being pedantic)
But also you have to consider....if the places are so godawful bad...why do they keep electing Dems, even in Texas? And continue to grow in population and economy (except Detroit...that place if fubar)? Maybe you should tone down the partisan reality blinders.
so we should regulate all businesses out of business?
its easy to pass a law ("there oughta be a law!!")
but these laws do have a cost.
you can raise prices, but only so much of that cost can be passed onto consumers overnight.
raise prices too much too fast and consumers go somewhere else.
believe it or not, most business owners dont piss on their employees. but neither do they run their companies as jobs programs. they're in it to make a buck (shocker!), and if they go out of business, no one is happy. they're not all saints, but theyre not all satan either.
that said, there are plenty of companies that skirt the law through various tricks (re: Walmart working people just under the limit that would require providing benefits). but generally speaking, employers are required to pay OT. why it's important to know the laws for your area.
Lastly, your employer isn't required to pay you overtime or give you comp time.
Actually that's not true.
Federal law (FLSA) requires overtime pay unless covered by certain exemptions. The exemptions are governed by 3 legal tests, which must all be met in order to fall under the exemption. One exemption is for persons engaged in fishing (since the boat can be out for longer than 8 hours, even days at a time), or similar employees who's job doesnt fit the idea of a normal 8 hour shift (military personel fall under this too).
Additionally state laws have various things to say as well, and their own codified exemptions (since the state level often knows more about local/regional work), which do not supercede the FLSA, but merely augment it. IE, if either FLSA or state law require it, you gotta pay it. Example (minus exemptions): In OK and GA, any hours over 40 in a week is overtime and must be paid. In Tennessee and few other states, it's a bit different, in that any hours over 8 in a day is overtime (which gets interesting for some fire departments: guy friend of mine works a 3 on, 4 off shift. 72 hours of work a week, with 48 of it being overtime....slightly shady, but nice if you can get it)
Point is: minus the exemptions, employees indeed ARE required to pay overtime.