I am a private pilot, and I can say that I have NEVER been able to get my cell phone to work much above 20,000.
Well, that's 10k feet above the altitude claimed by the OP to be the point where it simply wouldn't work. Thank you for confirming what others have reported.
It might work in some denser areas like the east coast, but along the west coast and much of the Midwest it does not work. This is first hand experience from 100's of hours of flying.
That mostly matches what I've heard from others - the functioning of cell phones in the air [in private aircraft] correlates pretty much with population density below.
I wish slashdotters would stop thinking they are experts on everything, but as a long time slashdot reader, I know that will never happen.
Since I didn't do so, I can only assume you are making a general comment.
I fly on Air Force flights, which are not subject to FAA regulations, and the main problem with cell phones on airplanes is the fact that they DO NOT WORK.
A claim that multiple private pilots here on Slashdot have already shown to be false.
Fear of instrument interference was due to older, analog units with less defined spectrum. With ALL equipment in aircraft being shielded these days there is almost NO possibility of a disturbance in flight.
And thats just the problem - the possibility, while small, is nonzero. Multiple a very small number (the chance of interference) by a very large number (the millions of passenger miles flown in the US each year), and the odds of a problem increase greatly.
Besides, your 50mW transmitter is no match for, oh, the sun.
If the sun put out enough energy (in the proper bands) to interfere with cellphone operations - then cell phones wouldn't work. They do work.
I would bet that the electric motors on the landing gear ( or hydraulic pumps that may power them) put out more EMF in just about every frequency known to man than all the cell phones that might be in call at once.
A claim that fails the laugh test. For the first part - 'every frequency known to man' is physically impossible, as an electric motor can produce neither microwaves nor LF waves. For the second part - every electric and electronic component on an aircraft is tested to ensure that it does not interfere with any other part.
However, there's also a restriction on hand-held TVs/radios and GPSs, and I've always wondered why, since they're all receive-only. I don't see how it's possible for them to cause any interference (or at least no more interference than a laptop computer) since they're only picking up on signals that are already passing through the plane from an external source.
Even though they are recieve only - the can still emit RF energy from internal circuits. (TVs and radios for example have RF amplifiers inside - and those amplifiers are rarely shielded.)
But, how much money could I make if I started a business that installed Faraday cages into movie theaters?
First, you have to figure out how many theatres will pays the tens of thousands (if not hundreds of thousands) of dollars you'll have to charge. I'd imagine the number [of theatres] isn't very large. (IOW, I think you seriously underestimate the difficulty of installing and maintaining Farady cages.)
I'll tell you what, if I know one theater in town has faraday cages and the others don't.. I'm goin to the one with the cages.
Sure - if the one with the cages is showing the movie I want to see.
One difference is that in the dot-com era, you saw companies valued billions operating in a market that was worth a fraction of that - in the hope that in the "new economy" there would suddenly be billions of new dollars pouring into all possible sectors of the economy. In contrast, Google is profitable
Sure. Google is profitable, but the bulk of it's revenue stream comes from a single source - web advertising.
This is the real question: Is this the equivilant of the first international Airport, or the first international dirigable-port?
Neither. It's the equivalent of the first amusement park - as the purpose of this 'spaceport' is entertainment, not the transshipment of goods, or travel.
1: They, (the Chinese), are responsible for keeping our currency (the dollar) afloat since they are holding a good chunk of our debt.
Check, though a bit oversimplified. The Chinese can't just dump their reserves out, because the impact on the world will be too drastic. They're in a better position than the US, but can't really take advantage of it.
No need to worry about the rest of the world - the impact on their own economy and currency from dumping their reserves will be devastating to them. There is no way to dump those reserves fast enough to cause real damage to the US, but slowly enough to avoid having to take massive losses. The two are simply mutually incompatible.
"Plans" == "Powerpoints" != "Accomplishments" Thus, TFA (which I might point out is unsourced [1]) is incorrect in treating plans as if they were accomplished facts.
I should also point out that various functionaries in the Chinese space progam have been shopping around grand plans for China in space for a couple of years now. One who is familiar with the history of space exploration might note that NASA functionaries did the same thing in the 60's (as well as off and on since then), shopping around grandiose plans far in excess of the political goals of the national leadership. Russia's space officials have been doing the same thing since a little after the fall of the USSR. The results of all three agencies propoganda and planning are noticeable by their absence.
The only concrete results of these (Chinese) "plans" has been a heap of fearmongering FUD on Slashdot and in the blogosphere. All available evidence points towards the Chinese continuing their space program at it's current glacial pace. (Though the term 'glacial' is perhaps inappropriate - as it implies that glaciers have the same blazing speed normally associated with continental drift.) They have just enough of a program to convince the world that they are a Great Nation - and not a Yuan more. (Which is pretty much true of all nations space programs.)
[1] And the "100 Year Vision of Greatness" cited by the submitter only appears on the same website, by the same author as the "Technology Development Plans" article. This seems fairly suspicious.
Or, alternatively, turn the "open source is a good thing for building your reputation" concept to your advantage: post a "hall of shame" page on your project's web page or in its release notes, that lists the names and all known contact information for people who have caused problems. Ammend your license terms to require that the list be distrubted along with the source for the software.
You've never heard, I take it, of slander or libel?
That depends on where it is in Berkeley county the DC goes up. Down on the south side, living in Charleston, Summerville, or Goose Creek is an option. Further up - it becomes less and less so. (Unless they've finally fixed up 52.)
Doesn't look like it. I live about a mile from the site. I just looked on Google Maps and Google Earth and I see where it is but the maps do not show that the ground has been broken yet. Trust me, the construction began months ago.
I don't think you or the OP AC realise that Google [Earth|Maps] data is updated on a _very_ irregular basis with an emphasis on large metropolitan areas. (Which Charleston isn't.) Data can be as much as six years out of date.
WTF people? IF and WHEN something like this happens to you, you will change your tune VERY quickly.
Indeed. (And your point #3 especially galls me, being a landlord is not the same as being rich. In fact, it's a pretty easy way to lose your shirt if you aren't careful and a little lucky. I know - I've been a landlord.)
RTFA. This was a piece of rental property that the woman owned. It was empty. None of her personal things were taken.
Huh? The fixtures etc... taken from the rental property were certainly her property. Theft is theft.
Assuming the tenant didn't know the rental had been cleaned out, this could have easily been an honest mistake: a former tenant giving away the personal possessions he believed were left behind in his apartment. Without having read the original post, there's no reason to imagine the intent was "come steal my landlord's the water heater and windows" rather than "come get a free couch that I left behind when I had to move in with my sister in a hurry."
Granted, inviting everyone on Craig's list to empty out a house and not making arrangements to insure someone is around to meet them may not be particularly thoughtful. But it's hardly robbery.
Regardless of his intent (malicious or merely stupid), when his lease/rental was terminated he lost the right to acess the property and (more importantly) the right to grant others acess to the property. (Something that, as a landlord in Washington state, I've had to point out to former and soon to be former tenants on several occasions.) Further, the original post specifically stated "everything on the property is free" - which is a rather sweeping statement.
If the evicted tenant did make the post, then I suspect that under the law he is liable - at least civilly if not criminally.
Here's the problem with that: even if we started cutting back our CO2 output (disregarding all of the other pollution we put out that's causing us problems now) by 1% cumulative per year it would still be a long time before we stopped putting out more CO2 than the system can ordinarily handle.
You know how much CO2 the system can handle - get thee to Stockholm! A Nobel prize awaits you for this important discovery in climatic science.
Oh, wait - just like your original post, this post isn't about facts, its about whining and exaggeration.
Moderating my parent comment Overrated before it has even been up-moderated is an abuse of the moderation system. It is abundantly clear that the moderation was used in this case because someone did not agree with me,
Ah yes - when else fails claim you are being persecuted. For the record, if I'd had mod points, I'd have rated your messages 'overrated' too - not because I disagree with you, but because your posts are unmitigated crap.
I know numerous Windows server administrators who'd be surprised at the claim that you'd need to visit such a datacenter 'every few days', or even 'every few weeks'. You might try sticking to the facts rather than FUD before you accuse Microsoft of spin. Glass houses and all that.
Widespread 3D printers will probably mean that we buy less pre-fabricated items from shops, which will reduce shipping.
And the materials you load the printer with are transported by magic fairy dust? Seriously - if you buy raw materials rather than finished goods, both have to be packaged and shipped. There's no saving to be had that I can see.
It also reminds me of this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kuGvPhglGEc which might be a nice idea, but it's an enormous use of energy for something we can do perfectly well without a machine.
It's a nice idea - but I can see significant flaws in the claims and implementation. First off, I don't buy his claim that you 'no longer need to wash your dishes'. If you don't, then food residues build up inside your machine. (I shouldn't have to point out the health risks there.) Second off - just my day to day collection of dishware cannot be created from 5 inch blanks. My dinner plates (like most peoples) are larger than that, as are my soup/chowder bowls.
An additional issue is his size claim - the size of an 'average dishwasher'. My complete collection of dishware, including two sizes of plates, four sizes/types of bowls, and my collection of Japanese dishware (for when I cook Oriental) takes up about half the space of my dishwasher even though I have an unusually large collection.
If you check further in, you'll find out that even though it's perfectly restored, it's illegal to drive -- KITT isn't enviromentally friendly currently.
Not quite correct. It's quite legal to drive cars of that vintage - so long as their original anti-pollution systems are intact. KITT's are not. (Which means it would not have been street legal even then.)
You could, I suppose, invent a new game in which money did not ever leave the game and return to the Bank - perhaps you could put the money from fines and fees and so forth into some jackpot, and designate a square such that anybody landing there would collect all the wealth accumulated there - but that game would last forever, become incredibly frustrating once everybody had so much money that they didn't care about landing on Mayfair, and would basically not be Monopoly.
My family has played such a variant for years - fees and fines accumulate and are paid out to the individual that lands on Free Parking. The games most certainly do not 'last forever', about two-three hours tops.
For instance: The four-bladed "helicopter" should auto-gyro nicely. If it loses its tether the blades keep spinning and keep providing lift - in the correct direction even. By transferring power from one blade to another as needed you can navigate it like a glider - even upwind, trading altitude for blade momentum as you drop. This lets you fly it to a landing area, landing vertically and quite gently, even without any additional power source onboard. Or find an updraft and soar until any crummy weather at ground level has moved on.
And what happens in the meantime to the 10km of (pretty heavy) power transfer and anchoring cable?
Cellphones were used effectively by passengers and cabin crew during the 9/11 hijackings, apparently without messing up ground communications.
So what? You can't really effectively extrapolate from a handful of aircraft scattered across a large volume of airspace for an hour or so to the effects on (for example) the airspace near O'Hare or Hartsfield-Jackson, or dozens of other airports, on a day-in day-out basis.
Logically, if it's a technical problem using a cellphone from a plane, it would also be a problem using it from the top of a tall building. In a metropolitan area, the top of a skyscraper would be "line of sight" to hundreds of cellphone towers.
I shouldn't have to point out that tall buildings aren't moving at hundreds of miles per hour in relation to those towers. There's orders of magnitudes difference between the two switching problems. (The problem of connectivity to a moving car isn't in the same ballpark either.)
I've watched both being built - which is the origin of my comment that the difference in enviromental impact may be less than you night. I missed another impact in my original message too - where possible the railroad frequently provides an acess road adjacent to the track. If the train is electrical, there is also the trackside infrastructure for electrification that must considered.
I suspect that the impact of a train system overall is in fact less than a highway system, but I am not certain that the difference is actually as great as one might think at first glance.
Where I go to college, one of my professors (in a social science) has a standing bet with all his students: if we ever have to write a term paper for our job in the real world (i.e., not academia), he'll donate $25 to the charity of our choice. He's been teaching since the 1970s and has never had to pay up.
Then he's probably defining the term 'term paper' in some nonstandard or unusual way. Virtually every serious professional I know writes at least one, and in some cases many more, research reports of one form or another as part of their job.
Whatever papers he writes, he insists on being done in a memorandum format, with no cover pages or in-text cites, and MAYBE something akin to a references page on the end. The focus is much more about getting facts on paper from whatever sources we deem suitable, not doing elaborate research to look impressive.
What he's doing here is making his job easier - because grading is simpler. He's also cheaping out the education he provides to his students, as a properly written term paper is much more than just reguritating facts.
Another benefit of the memo style over a term paper is that we can't be long-winded. We're given a maximum page length, not a minimum (usually around four to five pages), into which we have to cram 15 or so term-paper-pages' worth of material. It's surprisingly difficult, but (according to him; I'm not yet in the real world full-time) that kind of skill is vastly important and not taught enough. Real-world types: does this sound accurate (and/or wise)?
No, it doesn't sound wise. It sounds like he's avoiding having to think about whether or not his students are thinking, and able to form cogent and clear arguements and to support them. (Which at the college level is the purpose of a term paper.)
Slashdot Mirror
Well, that's 10k feet above the altitude claimed by the OP to be the point where it simply wouldn't work. Thank you for confirming what others have reported.
That mostly matches what I've heard from others - the functioning of cell phones in the air [in private aircraft] correlates pretty much with population density below.
Since I didn't do so, I can only assume you are making a general comment.
A claim that multiple private pilots here on Slashdot have already shown to be false.
And thats just the problem - the possibility, while small, is nonzero. Multiple a very small number (the chance of interference) by a very large number (the millions of passenger miles flown in the US each year), and the odds of a problem increase greatly.
If the sun put out enough energy (in the proper bands) to interfere with cellphone operations - then cell phones wouldn't work. They do work.
A claim that fails the laugh test. For the first part - 'every frequency known to man' is physically impossible, as an electric motor can produce neither microwaves nor LF waves. For the second part - every electric and electronic component on an aircraft is tested to ensure that it does not interfere with any other part.
Even though they are recieve only - the can still emit RF energy from internal circuits. (TVs and radios for example have RF amplifiers inside - and those amplifiers are rarely shielded.)
First, you have to figure out how many theatres will pays the tens of thousands (if not hundreds of thousands) of dollars you'll have to charge. I'd imagine the number [of theatres] isn't very large. (IOW, I think you seriously underestimate the difficulty of installing and maintaining Farady cages.)
Sure - if the one with the cages is showing the movie I want to see.
Sure. Google is profitable, but the bulk of it's revenue stream comes from a single source - web advertising.
Neither. It's the equivalent of the first amusement park - as the purpose of this 'spaceport' is entertainment, not the transshipment of goods, or travel.
No need to worry about the rest of the world - the impact on their own economy and currency from dumping their reserves will be devastating to them. There is no way to dump those reserves fast enough to cause real damage to the US, but slowly enough to avoid having to take massive losses. The two are simply mutually incompatible.
"Plans" == "Powerpoints" != "Accomplishments" Thus, TFA (which I might point out is unsourced [1]) is incorrect in treating plans as if they were accomplished facts.
I should also point out that various functionaries in the Chinese space progam have been shopping around grand plans for China in space for a couple of years now. One who is familiar with the history of space exploration might note that NASA functionaries did the same thing in the 60's (as well as off and on since then), shopping around grandiose plans far in excess of the political goals of the national leadership. Russia's space officials have been doing the same thing since a little after the fall of the USSR. The results of all three agencies propoganda and planning are noticeable by their absence.
The only concrete results of these (Chinese) "plans" has been a heap of fearmongering FUD on Slashdot and in the blogosphere. All available evidence points towards the Chinese continuing their space program at it's current glacial pace. (Though the term 'glacial' is perhaps inappropriate - as it implies that glaciers have the same blazing speed normally associated with continental drift.) They have just enough of a program to convince the world that they are a Great Nation - and not a Yuan more. (Which is pretty much true of all nations space programs.)
[1] And the "100 Year Vision of Greatness" cited by the submitter only appears on the same website, by the same author as the "Technology Development Plans" article. This seems fairly suspicious.
That's the oft repeated bromide. It's not entirely true.
You've never heard, I take it, of slander or libel?
That depends on where it is in Berkeley county the DC goes up. Down on the south side, living in Charleston, Summerville, or Goose Creek is an option. Further up - it becomes less and less so. (Unless they've finally fixed up 52.)
I don't think you or the OP AC realise that Google [Earth|Maps] data is updated on a _very_ irregular basis with an emphasis on large metropolitan areas. (Which Charleston isn't.) Data can be as much as six years out of date.
Indeed. (And your point #3 especially galls me, being a landlord is not the same as being rich. In fact, it's a pretty easy way to lose your shirt if you aren't careful and a little lucky. I know - I've been a landlord.)
Huh? The fixtures etc... taken from the rental property were certainly her property. Theft is theft.
Regardless of his intent (malicious or merely stupid), when his lease/rental was terminated he lost the right to acess the property and (more importantly) the right to grant others acess to the property. (Something that, as a landlord in Washington state, I've had to point out to former and soon to be former tenants on several occasions.) Further, the original post specifically stated "everything on the property is free" - which is a rather sweeping statement.
If the evicted tenant did make the post, then I suspect that under the law he is liable - at least civilly if not criminally.
You know how much CO2 the system can handle - get thee to Stockholm! A Nobel prize awaits you for this important discovery in climatic science.
Oh, wait - just like your original post, this post isn't about facts, its about whining and exaggeration.
Ah yes - when else fails claim you are being persecuted. For the record, if I'd had mod points, I'd have rated your messages 'overrated' too - not because I disagree with you, but because your posts are unmitigated crap.
I know numerous Windows server administrators who'd be surprised at the claim that you'd need to visit such a datacenter 'every few days', or even 'every few weeks'. You might try sticking to the facts rather than FUD before you accuse Microsoft of spin. Glass houses and all that.
I should not have to point out that 'replica' != 'original'.
I see no reason to assume that.
And the materials you load the printer with are transported by magic fairy dust? Seriously - if you buy raw materials rather than finished goods, both have to be packaged and shipped. There's no saving to be had that I can see.
It's a nice idea - but I can see significant flaws in the claims and implementation. First off, I don't buy his claim that you 'no longer need to wash your dishes'. If you don't, then food residues build up inside your machine. (I shouldn't have to point out the health risks there.) Second off - just my day to day collection of dishware cannot be created from 5 inch blanks. My dinner plates (like most peoples) are larger than that, as are my soup/chowder bowls.
An additional issue is his size claim - the size of an 'average dishwasher'. My complete collection of dishware, including two sizes of plates, four sizes/types of bowls, and my collection of Japanese dishware (for when I cook Oriental) takes up about half the space of my dishwasher even though I have an unusually large collection.
Not quite correct. It's quite legal to drive cars of that vintage - so long as their original anti-pollution systems are intact. KITT's are not. (Which means it would not have been street legal even then.)
My family has played such a variant for years - fees and fines accumulate and are paid out to the individual that lands on Free Parking. The games most certainly do not 'last forever', about two-three hours tops.
And what happens in the meantime to the 10km of (pretty heavy) power transfer and anchoring cable?
If you can't define it - then it's pretty much meaningless.
So what? You can't really effectively extrapolate from a handful of aircraft scattered across a large volume of airspace for an hour or so to the effects on (for example) the airspace near O'Hare or Hartsfield-Jackson, or dozens of other airports, on a day-in day-out basis.
I shouldn't have to point out that tall buildings aren't moving at hundreds of miles per hour in relation to those towers. There's orders of magnitudes difference between the two switching problems. (The problem of connectivity to a moving car isn't in the same ballpark either.)
I've watched both being built - which is the origin of my comment that the difference in enviromental impact may be less than you night. I missed another impact in my original message too - where possible the railroad frequently provides an acess road adjacent to the track. If the train is electrical, there is also the trackside infrastructure for electrification that must considered.
I suspect that the impact of a train system overall is in fact less than a highway system, but I am not certain that the difference is actually as great as one might think at first glance.
Then he's probably defining the term 'term paper' in some nonstandard or unusual way. Virtually every serious professional I know writes at least one, and in some cases many more, research reports of one form or another as part of their job.
What he's doing here is making his job easier - because grading is simpler. He's also cheaping out the education he provides to his students, as a properly written term paper is much more than just reguritating facts.
No, it doesn't sound wise. It sounds like he's avoiding having to think about whether or not his students are thinking, and able to form cogent and clear arguements and to support them. (Which at the college level is the purpose of a term paper.)