Yes the person seemed to think that the law was unlimited and that is what I was replying too. As to being non-sequitur not really. Once the concept that limits to free speech are allowable when those limits protect members of the population from harm you can take the next step in the discussion. What "controls" are the internet are they talking about? What conditions will trigger those controls? For instance if an ISP was the source of attacks at vital infrastructure would it be allowable for the government to isolate that ISP from the rest of the internet? If an attack was coming from outside the US would it be allowable to isolate the US from internet traffic from outside the US? While nobody should think that it is correct to shut off the internet because someone says that Bush or Obama shouldn't be president there are situations where limiting access to parts of it would be prudent. Just as in time of war means of travel and other means of communications can be limited. And the argument that it can be abused is not valid since any law can be abused. The valid discussion at that point is what safe guards need to be in place.
So two people that are not in congress, not elected officials, and currently not in government employ stated an opinion? Shocking! I tell you what will be next it is the end of all freedom when two people with no official standing can publicly say such an opinion!
So as I said, I have heard not official call for the death penalty have you?
Why would you think that? Every discusion of the First Amendment starts off with the limits of protected speech starting with the classic shouting fire in a crowded theater. You can not threaten people. For example someone can not send you threatening email or call you constantly. That is called harassment. There are limits to how close Right to Life groups can protest to Abortion Provider location. Someone can not say that they know for a fact that you rape little children unless they actually do know that for a fact. And you can not broadcast music or commercials over an Amateur radio.
Exactly which of these limitations do you have a problem with? Usually this is covered at around the 5th grade level civics class but at least by high school. I really do wonder about the people that post on Slashdot.
Excuse me? But who? What? I have heard prosecution but no official call for the death penalty. But then I have heard people say that Bush should have been shot but they where not serious so it was okay correct?
dwindling GPS market? Stand along GPSs maybe getting smaller and smaller but that is because GPS is in every cell phone and most cars on the planet. Throw in Boats and Aircraft and you have booming market for GPSs just not standalone.
I thought it had a weapons bay. And no disrespect to the project just the write up and the summary saying "next a carrier landing".
My guess is that you guys will do the same process as a manned aircraft more or less. Long before you do carrier trials you will do a full set of flight tests and then trials doing simulated carrier landings on a runway just like every carrier plane the US has ever flown. I am pretty sure that no airplane made it's second landing on a carrier but I could be wrong.
As to AtoA that could be nasty. I guess you could use an E-2 or F-18 to provide targeting and then have X-47B sneak up and fire an AIM-120 with little to no warning. So when are you going to have it do mid air refueling?
1. Carrier trials are not until 2013 so they are not "next". 2. This isn't a fighter it is an attack aircraft or a bomber. Actually a light bomber but then the F-117 Stealth Fighter was not a fighter but also a bomber and or attack aircraft.
There isn't a gaming PC on the market for $299 that is worth using. Add in the cost of a big monitor and controllers and it is a none starter. And I would say that you are not correct about what is keeping PC in peoples homes. It is the Internet that is keeping the PC in the home. Notice that Microsoft didn't put a browser on the 360. PC Gaming has a lot of issues, hardware costs and piracy are the two big ones. Thing is that some games will always be better on a PC and their will always be people laying games on the PC. Now where they did shot themselves in the foot is that PC games to not work with Live seamlessly. That is a real issue an one that I blame more on the PC side than the XBox side of things.
I don't think one had anything to do with the other. Vista was a huge mess but it sure wasn't from lack of resources. Microsoft figured that it could do no wrong and people would just buy it. Well they really blew it on so many levels but I do not think that XBox had a thing to do with that but that is my opinion. The thing is that Microsoft could end up in a world of hurt if they do not keep up with the way people use communications. Computers are very rarely used as computers any longer. The total time used "crunching numbers" is really very small. Computers have become communication and entertainment devices. People are now using mobile devices more and more for that. Microsoft almost lost the netbook market but decided to keep selling XP. In fact Microsoft could have massively failed if they had not retreated on XP sales. Now they are at risk because of tablets. Just how much of todays work load could be done with a tablet docked with a keyboard and a touch pad? At home I would say that solution would work for 95% of the none gamers. It could also work for a lot of office work. Once that happens Microsofts core business is at risk. Today Microsoft's strength in the OS space is based on being cheaper than OS/X for the home market and it's ability to run legacy software in the business market. That is a terrible position to be in. What if Apple decided to go nuclear and offer a $599 notebook or a $299 desktop? What if more and more people decide that they don't need a PC because a Tablet will do what they need? No they must explore other options or risk becoming another DEC.
The there is nothing wrong with Microsoft not making money on a product line from the start. The 360 I believe is now turning a profit. It is well liked and doesn't have the "old dull boring" stink that other Microsoft products have. They also see it as a gateway to the living room and the TV. I see it as Microsoft's attempt in the future to become your cable TV provider. AKA pushing shows to the X-Box for fun and profit while making Comcast and others into the dumb pipes they should e.
DEC like TI blew in a way blew it because they didn't want to kill their markets. DEC had single chip versions of the PDP11 the F11 cpu. They could have combined them with one of their single users OSs and produced a computer that was more powerful and with a larger software base then CP/M or the PC had at launch. DEC could have sold the CPUs and OS to other manufactures after the launched the first machine and became Intel and MIcrosoft combined. Thing was they didn't want to not sell high margin PDP-11s to people.
TI used the same CPU in the 99/4 line as it used in it's minicomputers. Again they crippled it so they didn't complete with themselves.
I think IBM went with the PC being so not like the System 34, 36, 38, or 360/370 computers to draw a hard line between their "personal computer" and their real computers. DEC really did have a chance to grab the business market early with the F11 if they had just wanted it. Instead they simply ignored it. Which is really sad IMHO. One wonders if DEC would have been more fun to deal with all these years then Intel, Microsoft and in the past IBM.
But VMS is still around and NT/XP/Vista/7 are related to it. The Alpha team went to both AMD and Intel and that DNA is in the Athlon and Itantium line. I blame Itantium's failings on the PA-RISC DNA and DEC help push the ARM line forward with their Strong ARM line which is owned by Marvell. Plus there machines are the birth places of Adventure and Zork!
I think they could turn it around if they where willing to be humble. That will be the problem can the suits give the geeks the respect they need to get good products. Windows Phone 7 is a disaster at this point in time. If it had come out when the iPhone one hit the market they would have had a chance but it is behind in features. 1. No cut and paste. "releasing it to developers doesn't count. It will count when customers have it". 2. Less multitasking than the iPhone. And The excuse that it is a now OS really does ring hollow... Windows Phone 7! it isn't Windows Phone 1. Microsoft has been in the market for around a decade folks. Then you have the marketing side. I am really into tech and I know next to nothing about Windows Phone 7. Does it have seamless integration with exchange? Better than or equal to Blackberry? Does it have seamless integration with Hotmail? As good as Gmail is integrated with Android? Voice commands as good as Android? Hey they seem to work really well with sync which is a Microsoft product. What about Evernote and Dropbox? Pandora? What about bar code readers? What about shopping apps?
I am picking on Windows Phone but it seems to be a big part of the problem. Tablets? Well Microsoft pushed them for years but they failed to catch on. Apple knocked it out of the park.
What they need to do is make a dream product. Be bold and push the limits. They have a big pile of cash still and they better start investing it in some blue sky projects that will just blow peoples socks off. Or maybe turn the tablet and phone projects over to the XBox team.
Okay thank you. I know know that you are totally insane or just a just a troll. Beyond reason or logic and willing to live in the abstract with any grasp of practicality.
Restricting the ability to communicate of a foreign power when at total war is a corner case. Same as rationing, the draft, and limiting travel outside the country during total war are all corner cases. Wow so you really think that it would have been wrong for the US government to open a nice think envelope or big package addressed to and address in Berlin in 1943? Really? Or to tap a phone call being made to Germany? Or even just cut off communications? Really now think about it. WWII was the last time the US really was in an all out total war situation and the last time that the government used the power to stop telecommunications to another nation.
Some but over all I am not sure how much that savings would be. The ability to upgrade things like the APUs while not worrying as much about man rating those changes I see as a big savings but every bit would count.
I doubt you would save much by removing Life support. You may gain a bit of payload. Making it a UAV would be pretty easy. It is already FBW so adding the control system would be pretty easy. Boeing has a bunch of cost saving improvements that where never funded that they could probably apply if they didn't have to make it man rated. Things like removing the APUs and replacing them with electrical systems.
You sir are a wack attack and can not be reached with reason or example. Please just keep shaking in fear controlled by those that use that fear. You are well in their power. It is wise to have reasonable questions about issues. Have extreme fear over corner cases that don't matter is insane.
React is a good thing. It can mount it or offer to show you the contents. Even offering to run a setup program or installer can have merit. But to just run a binary is foolish. The user should at least have to ok the action. React good. act without consent and or control is a bad thing.
Really? Since the government already has that power and has since 1930 something then I would say just keep your fear level the same as it has been all these years. So far the record of abuse of that power over the last 80 or so years has been zero. But you keep shaking in unfounded fear. Just as people feel that some forces are using exaggerated fear of terrorism as a tool control so are some other groups are using unfounded fear of the government to control you. This is a none issue and perfectly reasonable. I mean really go back to 1943 and do you a think that a letter dropped in the mail box in the US addressed to Germany should have just been delivered unopened or at all? Because that is what you are endorsing and the level of stupidity that you are recommending. Next you will be saying that British Ultra team where anti freedom because they violated privacy and kept there work secret from the population! Pure wack attack at that point.
I hate to ask you this but just what power do you think the government wouldn't have in an all out war situation? I mean really? Do you think that you could have sent an letter, telegram, or made a phone call to Germany in 1943?
Yes in a situation that rivals WWII expect the possibility of that happening. Wow scary. You better stock up on shotguns and can goods.
"I think this is a common problem for all aerodynamic vehicles, isn't it? We've done some good work in that area if I recall." Actually as aircraft get larger and larger the weight of the landing gear goes up even quicker. Take a look at a 747s landing gear compared to say a 737 some time. The problem gets worse as the fraction of the weight that is take up by fuel goes up. A single stage to orbit craft is hard. The is why we don't have one yet.
Then you have the problem of the wing. As your speed range and fuel fraction go up the problem gets worse and worse. It is easy to make a wing that works at between 50 MPH and 100 MPH. It is actually pretty hard to make a wing that works well from say 100 MPH and 500 MPH. To make a wing work well between 200 MPH and 10,000 MPH is extremely difficult. So if you have enough thrust to reach orbit you will probably have enough thrust for a vertical take off. By going for a vertical take off you can keep the lifting surfaces smaller since they will only have to take the landing weight and you can keep the structural weight lower since the wings are smaller and the landing loads a lot lower.
"I'm guessing spars will be part of the lifting surface structure, but if there is an alternative, cut these." Spars are the support structure. They must be sized based on physical loads of vehicular weight. The lifting structure are based on the speeds involved and aerodynamic properties. Spars often have to take none aero loads such as landing gear loads as well as the loads imposed by the wing. Cut them?
"Yes, it does. I'm not as daft as you think I am, though I'm not writing the same stuff as you. this sometimes leads people to think someone 'doesn't get it'." Let me ask this? Do you have any knowledge of structural engineering, aerodynamics, or material science? It takes a great deal of effort and knowledge to design an airplane that can take off from a 300 foot strip, fly four people 1000 miles at 200 mph with only a 200 HP motor. Actually I am not sure any plane can do that yet a few are close. Now to build something that can take off at 200 miles an hour, fly into orbit, and come back has not been done yet and may not be possible with today's tech. It is going to take a while and it is going to take at least a scram jet. No I am pretty sure that you really just don't get it. What you want is as out of reach of us today as a 747 was in 1918. What we really need is a DC-3 at this time. The shuttle was at best the Spirit of Saint Louis or a Victor Vimy. I do think that if we tried we could build a Shuttle that would be a DC-3 today if we took everything that we learned but the political will still isn't there for the expense. Hopefully we can get a working Scram jet which may get us to the DC-7 level. But yes you your posts are full of fantasy and it would nice ifs.
Slashdot Mirror
Why? geosync satellites drift of their own accord without station keeping. If you are not in a rush it will be pretty cheap.
Yes the person seemed to think that the law was unlimited and that is what I was replying too. As to being non-sequitur not really. Once the concept that limits to free speech are allowable when those limits protect members of the population from harm you can take the next step in the discussion.
What "controls" are the internet are they talking about? What conditions will trigger those controls?
For instance if an ISP was the source of attacks at vital infrastructure would it be allowable for the government to isolate that ISP from the rest of the internet?
If an attack was coming from outside the US would it be allowable to isolate the US from internet traffic from outside the US?
While nobody should think that it is correct to shut off the internet because someone says that Bush or Obama shouldn't be president there are situations where limiting access to parts of it would be prudent. Just as in time of war means of travel and other means of communications can be limited.
And the argument that it can be abused is not valid since any law can be abused. The valid discussion at that point is what safe guards need to be in place.
So two people that are not in congress, not elected officials, and currently not in government employ stated an opinion?
Shocking! I tell you what will be next it is the end of all freedom when two people with no official standing can publicly say such an opinion!
So as I said, I have heard not official call for the death penalty have you?
Why would you think that? Every discusion of the First Amendment starts off with the limits of protected speech starting with the classic shouting fire in a crowded theater.
You can not threaten people. For example someone can not send you threatening email or call you constantly. That is called harassment.
There are limits to how close Right to Life groups can protest to Abortion Provider location.
Someone can not say that they know for a fact that you rape little children unless they actually do know that for a fact.
And you can not broadcast music or commercials over an Amateur radio.
Exactly which of these limitations do you have a problem with?
Usually this is covered at around the 5th grade level civics class but at least by high school.
I really do wonder about the people that post on Slashdot.
Excuse me? But who? What? I have heard prosecution but no official call for the death penalty. But then I have heard people say that Bush should have been shot but they where not serious so it was okay correct?
dwindling GPS market?
Stand along GPSs maybe getting smaller and smaller but that is because GPS is in every cell phone and most cars on the planet. Throw in Boats and Aircraft and you have booming market for GPSs just not standalone.
I thought it had a weapons bay. And no disrespect to the project just the write up and the summary saying "next a carrier landing".
My guess is that you guys will do the same process as a manned aircraft more or less. Long before you do carrier trials you will do a full set of flight tests and then trials doing simulated carrier landings on a runway just like every carrier plane the US has ever flown.
I am pretty sure that no airplane made it's second landing on a carrier but I could be wrong.
As to AtoA that could be nasty. I guess you could use an E-2 or F-18 to provide targeting and then have X-47B sneak up and fire an AIM-120 with little to no warning.
So when are you going to have it do mid air refueling?
1. Carrier trials are not until 2013 so they are not "next".
2. This isn't a fighter it is an attack aircraft or a bomber. Actually a light bomber but then the F-117 Stealth Fighter was not a fighter but also a bomber and or attack aircraft.
There isn't a gaming PC on the market for $299 that is worth using. Add in the cost of a big monitor and controllers and it is a none starter. And I would say that you are not correct about what is keeping PC in peoples homes. It is the Internet that is keeping the PC in the home. Notice that Microsoft didn't put a browser on the 360.
PC Gaming has a lot of issues, hardware costs and piracy are the two big ones. Thing is that some games will always be better on a PC and their will always be people laying games on the PC.
Now where they did shot themselves in the foot is that PC games to not work with Live seamlessly.
That is a real issue an one that I blame more on the PC side than the XBox side of things.
I know I had Politics turned off on my front page.
Did that get broken as well as the checking comments?
I don't think one had anything to do with the other. Vista was a huge mess but it sure wasn't from lack of resources. Microsoft figured that it could do no wrong and people would just buy it. Well they really blew it on so many levels but I do not think that XBox had a thing to do with that but that is my opinion.
The thing is that Microsoft could end up in a world of hurt if they do not keep up with the way people use communications. Computers are very rarely used as computers any longer. The total time used "crunching numbers" is really very small. Computers have become communication and entertainment devices. People are now using mobile devices more and more for that. Microsoft almost lost the netbook market but decided to keep selling XP. In fact Microsoft could have massively failed if they had not retreated on XP sales. Now they are at risk because of tablets. Just how much of todays work load could be done with a tablet docked with a keyboard and a touch pad?
At home I would say that solution would work for 95% of the none gamers.
It could also work for a lot of office work. Once that happens Microsofts core business is at risk.
Today Microsoft's strength in the OS space is based on being cheaper than OS/X for the home market and it's ability to run legacy software in the business market.
That is a terrible position to be in. What if Apple decided to go nuclear and offer a $599 notebook or a $299 desktop?
What if more and more people decide that they don't need a PC because a Tablet will do what they need?
No they must explore other options or risk becoming another DEC.
You mean like how DEC, Control Data, and Wang kept to their core business and didn't get distracted by things like PCs?
The there is nothing wrong with Microsoft not making money on a product line from the start. The 360 I believe is now turning a profit. It is well liked and doesn't have the "old dull boring" stink that other Microsoft products have. They also see it as a gateway to the living room and the TV. I see it as Microsoft's attempt in the future to become your cable TV provider.
AKA pushing shows to the X-Box for fun and profit while making Comcast and others into the dumb pipes they should e.
DEC like TI blew in a way blew it because they didn't want to kill their markets.
DEC had single chip versions of the PDP11 the F11 cpu. They could have combined them with one of their single users OSs and produced a computer that was more powerful and with a larger software base then CP/M or the PC had at launch.
DEC could have sold the CPUs and OS to other manufactures after the launched the first machine and became Intel and MIcrosoft combined.
Thing was they didn't want to not sell high margin PDP-11s to people.
TI used the same CPU in the 99/4 line as it used in it's minicomputers. Again they crippled it so they didn't complete with themselves.
I think IBM went with the PC being so not like the System 34, 36, 38, or 360/370 computers to draw a hard line between their "personal computer" and their real computers.
DEC really did have a chance to grab the business market early with the F11 if they had just wanted it. Instead they simply ignored it. Which is really sad IMHO. One wonders if DEC would have been more fun to deal with all these years then Intel, Microsoft and in the past IBM.
But VMS is still around and NT/XP/Vista/7 are related to it. The Alpha team went to both AMD and Intel and that DNA is in the Athlon and Itantium line. I blame Itantium's failings on the PA-RISC DNA and DEC help push the ARM line forward with their Strong ARM line which is owned by Marvell.
Plus there machines are the birth places of Adventure and Zork!
I think they could turn it around if they where willing to be humble. That will be the problem can the suits give the geeks the respect they need to get good products.
Windows Phone 7 is a disaster at this point in time. If it had come out when the iPhone one hit the market they would have had a chance but it is behind in features.
1. No cut and paste. "releasing it to developers doesn't count. It will count when customers have it".
2. Less multitasking than the iPhone.
And The excuse that it is a now OS really does ring hollow... Windows Phone 7! it isn't Windows Phone 1. Microsoft has been in the market for around a decade folks.
Then you have the marketing side. I am really into tech and I know next to nothing about Windows Phone 7.
Does it have seamless integration with exchange? Better than or equal to Blackberry?
Does it have seamless integration with Hotmail? As good as Gmail is integrated with Android?
Voice commands as good as Android? Hey they seem to work really well with sync which is a Microsoft product.
What about Evernote and Dropbox? Pandora?
What about bar code readers?
What about shopping apps?
I am picking on Windows Phone but it seems to be a big part of the problem. Tablets? Well Microsoft pushed them for years but they failed to catch on. Apple knocked it out of the park.
What they need to do is make a dream product. Be bold and push the limits. They have a big pile of cash still and they better start investing it in some blue sky projects that will just blow peoples socks off.
Or maybe turn the tablet and phone projects over to the XBox team.
Okay thank you. I know know that you are totally insane or just a just a troll. Beyond reason or logic and willing to live in the abstract with any grasp of practicality.
Restricting the ability to communicate of a foreign power when at total war is a corner case.
Same as rationing, the draft, and limiting travel outside the country during total war are all corner cases.
Wow so you really think that it would have been wrong for the US government to open a nice think envelope or big package addressed to and address in Berlin in 1943? Really? Or to tap a phone call being made to Germany? Or even just cut off communications?
Really now think about it. WWII was the last time the US really was in an all out total war situation and the last time that the government used the power to stop telecommunications to another nation.
Some but over all I am not sure how much that savings would be. The ability to upgrade things like the APUs while not worrying as much about man rating those changes I see as a big savings but every bit would count.
I doubt you would save much by removing Life support. You may gain a bit of payload.
Making it a UAV would be pretty easy. It is already FBW so adding the control system would be pretty easy.
Boeing has a bunch of cost saving improvements that where never funded that they could probably apply if they didn't have to make it man rated. Things like removing the APUs and replacing them with electrical systems.
You sir are a wack attack and can not be reached with reason or example. Please just keep shaking in fear controlled by those that use that fear. You are well in their power.
It is wise to have reasonable questions about issues. Have extreme fear over corner cases that don't matter is insane.
React is a good thing.
It can mount it or offer to show you the contents. Even offering to run a setup program or installer can have merit.
But to just run a binary is foolish. The user should at least have to ok the action.
React good. act without consent and or control is a bad thing.
How?
Just asking?
Really? Since the government already has that power and has since 1930 something then I would say just keep your fear level the same as it has been all these years. So far the record of abuse of that power over the last 80 or so years has been zero.
But you keep shaking in unfounded fear. Just as people feel that some forces are using exaggerated fear of terrorism as a tool control so are some other groups are using unfounded fear of the government to control you. This is a none issue and perfectly reasonable.
I mean really go back to 1943 and do you a think that a letter dropped in the mail box in the US addressed to Germany should have just been delivered unopened or at all?
Because that is what you are endorsing and the level of stupidity that you are recommending. Next you will be saying that British Ultra team where anti freedom because they violated privacy and kept there work secret from the population!
Pure wack attack at that point.
I hate to ask you this but just what power do you think the government wouldn't have in an all out war situation?
I mean really? Do you think that you could have sent an letter, telegram, or made a phone call to Germany in 1943?
Yes in a situation that rivals WWII expect the possibility of that happening. Wow scary. You better stock up on shotguns and can goods.
"I think this is a common problem for all aerodynamic vehicles, isn't it? We've done some good work in that area if I recall."
Actually as aircraft get larger and larger the weight of the landing gear goes up even quicker. Take a look at a 747s landing gear compared to say a 737 some time. The problem gets worse as the fraction of the weight that is take up by fuel goes up. A single stage to orbit craft is hard. The is why we don't have one yet.
Then you have the problem of the wing. As your speed range and fuel fraction go up the problem gets worse and worse.
It is easy to make a wing that works at between 50 MPH and 100 MPH. It is actually pretty hard to make a wing that works well from say 100 MPH and 500 MPH. To make a wing work well between 200 MPH and 10,000 MPH is extremely difficult.
So if you have enough thrust to reach orbit you will probably have enough thrust for a vertical take off. By going for a vertical take off you can keep the lifting surfaces smaller since they will only have to take the landing weight and you can keep the structural weight lower since the wings are smaller and the landing loads a lot lower.
"I'm guessing spars will be part of the lifting surface structure, but if there is an alternative, cut these."
Spars are the support structure. They must be sized based on physical loads of vehicular weight. The lifting structure are based on the speeds involved and aerodynamic properties.
Spars often have to take none aero loads such as landing gear loads as well as the loads imposed by the wing.
Cut them?
"Yes, it does. I'm not as daft as you think I am, though I'm not writing the same stuff as you. this sometimes leads people to think someone 'doesn't get it'."
Let me ask this? Do you have any knowledge of structural engineering, aerodynamics, or material science?
It takes a great deal of effort and knowledge to design an airplane that can take off from a 300 foot strip, fly four people 1000 miles at 200 mph with only a 200 HP motor. Actually I am not sure any plane can do that yet a few are close.
Now to build something that can take off at 200 miles an hour, fly into orbit, and come back has not been done yet and may not be possible with today's tech. It is going to take a while and it is going to take at least a scram jet.
No I am pretty sure that you really just don't get it. What you want is as out of reach of us today as a 747 was in 1918. What we really need is a DC-3 at this time. The shuttle was at best the Spirit of Saint Louis or a Victor Vimy.
I do think that if we tried we could build a Shuttle that would be a DC-3 today if we took everything that we learned but the political will still isn't there for the expense. Hopefully we can get a working Scram jet which may get us to the DC-7 level.
But yes you your posts are full of fantasy and it would nice ifs.