That makes no sense. If a 40 year old or a 3 year old called me "doo doo head", obviously I wouldn't be insulted since those words have no meaning behind them other than "things 3 year olds say".
If a 40 year old or a 3 year old called me a "goddamn piece of shit" then, well in the first case, yeah, I'd be insulted, and the second, I'd question what the fuck the kid's parents have been teaching.
Words matter. But that's not even the point. My point is quoting a writer from the 60's really says nothing. I'm sure the JJ Abrams version of Uhura would have put the beat down on Lincoln. Which also doesn't matter, since it's still a random white guy writing a piece of FICTION.
Uh, you do realize your entire quotation is just the opinion/agenda of a random (and I guarantee you WHITE) TV writer in the 60's?
Irrelevant to today's situation (or even the situation back then). Not sure how "in the future blacks won't care when they are insulted" is in fact progress...
A 2 story fall into water (~20 feet, ~6 meters) is considered +90% lethal. These odds change radically if it is a controlled dive. This number is the guideline gathered by the US Navy, compiled from Sailors being blown over the deck.
Bullshit. I have seen people belly flop from a 5 meter platform (over 16') and while it's awful, 90% lethal is just a false statement. I have from that 5 meters many times, and while I didn't always stick the landing, I sure wasn't in mortal danger. In fact, the majority of people falling from a 2 STORY BUILDING survive.
So many reasons this is wrong... the "deck" (of an aircraft carrier) is about 60' high, not 20'. Also, stats have shown at least 5% of people jumping off of the Golden Gate Bridge (245') survived the fall (though most of those then drowned, of course). Trivial amount of Googling shows a couple estimates putting the LD50 of falling into water at about 60-100'.
I was going to say... even James Bond wore a helmet back in the '60s, as uncool as it was (though they did seem to find one that matched his three-piece suit...)
uh, for what? identifying markers for genetic diseases, phrenological alternative, neat T-Shirt designs? because if you're talking about identifying criminals its still nowhere near an exact science and depends very greatly on the disposition of prosecution and the care taken during collection as well as a wealth of other environmental factors.
True... a good photo/video (or even credible eye witness) is still a much better identifier than DNA, especially in the minds of most juries.
and we know we can pull out DNA.
dial it back there Kafka. your job is intelligence, not the blanket collection all mankinds genetic marker for some clandestine plot point to a steven king movie. Why do you need this DNA, how are you going to use it, are you even going about this legally?
No, his job is a research biochemist working on extraction of DNA/biological markers from skin as pure research. You are quoting the CEO of the company, not the CIA investors.
I see nothing wrong with his comment. He said nothing to discourage discussing other points, he made his own paid point.
Is it offensive to *you* that some people want to discuss the fact that Apple still makes more on the iPad than all but a few companies in the world do on any of their other products? Revenue dropping from 9 to 7 billion per quarter does in fact mean "Last Change To Save the iPad Line" is a ridiculous troll of a headline.
The number of people a transit system serves is determined by the choices of those people, not the administrators of the system.
It's obviously both, but in this case THEIR wording does refer to the administrators since by "expanding" they mean "adding additional stops". Kind of a "duh" comment, really...
Besides, plagiarism is the *intentional* claim of someone else's work as your own. If you can honestly and thoroughly prove that you didn't take something from someone else, it's not plagiarism (though good luck anyway if it is copyrighted).
As far as the BFI or anyone else "doctoring" evidence: they would have to have done it *before* it became international news with a case that may end up in the Supreme Court. And even then, given the scrutiny the case has now, if they had done it earlier the chances are WAY more likely than not their deception would be discovered and those doing it caught and prosecuted themselves...
No need to even speculate, it's just absurdity on the surface. A totally non-technical person made up a new "security" term to scare people. If you want to find a link countering it, it's trivial - including quotes from the DA that he made it up...
And working on it "in secret" means they are WAY behind Google. If you aren't using it in public streets with other cars you aren't going to get it right, and google has put way over 1M miles on public streets already.
I seem to see one about every other time I drive through Mountain View these days (and honestly they are kind of a menace on 35 MPH streets like Shoreline or El Camino since they won't go more than 25...)
If it's anything like the Tesla, they probably run various subsystems on different software, from no OS at all for the low level control systems, to possible simple automotive RTOS (OTEK?) for ECU (not sure if Tesla uses it, but I believe Bosch/BMW does), to Linux for things like infotainment and media consoles...
assuming the machine has been properly maintained, programmed, and designed.
Obviously, everyone knows this... so what's the point of being pessimistic about it? The modern non-self driving car already requires a ton of maintenance, programming, and design. Bad programming in your car could cause any number of problems anyway.
Your whole premise is silly because we are talking about NORTH KOREA.
1) if NK actually gets anything of a decent size a stable orbit you'd better believe it will be tracked by every country in the world capable of doing so - they'd know exactly where it is and who did it. 2) they can't do #1 right now. And launching an ICBM would be WAY simpler than #1, which was my point. 3) it's basically suicide at a national level if they ACTUALLY do either #1 or #2, so they don't REALLY want to use it, they want to bluster and threaten people with it. In that case they are much better off telling everyone they have a ICBM than that they have a space based nuke, as in the latter case anything NK ever launched into orbit would basically be shot down immediately and without repercussion as it violates international space law.
If that doesn't make sense to you, you should watch Dr. Strangelove... "The whole point of a Doomsday Machine is lost if you keep it a secret! Why didn't you tell the world?"
They don't have to have an ICBM, just get an object into orbit and they can drop it anywhere provided they have enough math skills
Eh... that's basically the definition of ICBM.
I suppose you could argue if they are actually launching a satellite into a stable *orbit* that would eventually drop a nuke with any accuracy it wouldn't technically be ballistic - but in that cast it's an order of magnitude more complex than an ICBM so what's the point...
Slashdot Mirror
That makes no sense. If a 40 year old or a 3 year old called me "doo doo head", obviously I wouldn't be insulted since those words have no meaning behind them other than "things 3 year olds say".
If a 40 year old or a 3 year old called me a "goddamn piece of shit" then, well in the first case, yeah, I'd be insulted, and the second, I'd question what the fuck the kid's parents have been teaching.
Words matter. But that's not even the point. My point is quoting a writer from the 60's really says nothing. I'm sure the JJ Abrams version of Uhura would have put the beat down on Lincoln. Which also doesn't matter, since it's still a random white guy writing a piece of FICTION.
Uh, you do realize your entire quotation is just the opinion/agenda of a random (and I guarantee you WHITE) TV writer in the 60's?
Irrelevant to today's situation (or even the situation back then). Not sure how "in the future blacks won't care when they are insulted" is in fact progress...
No, he doesn't, since the whole thing started with "2 story fall..."
Thanks, AC, for your utterly pointless comment.
A 2 story fall into water (~20 feet, ~6 meters) is considered +90% lethal. These odds change radically if it is a controlled dive. This number is the guideline gathered by the US Navy, compiled from Sailors being blown over the deck.
Bullshit. I have seen people belly flop from a 5 meter platform (over 16') and while it's awful, 90% lethal is just a false statement. I have from that 5 meters many times, and while I didn't always stick the landing, I sure wasn't in mortal danger. In fact, the majority of people falling from a 2 STORY BUILDING survive.
So many reasons this is wrong... the "deck" (of an aircraft carrier) is about 60' high, not 20'. Also, stats have shown at least 5% of people jumping off of the Golden Gate Bridge (245') survived the fall (though most of those then drowned, of course). Trivial amount of Googling shows a couple estimates putting the LD50 of falling into water at about 60-100'.
I was going to say... even James Bond wore a helmet back in the '60s, as uncool as it was (though they did seem to find one that matched his three-piece suit...)
http://www.craveonline.com/ima...
There's no better identifier than DNA
uh, for what? identifying markers for genetic diseases, phrenological alternative, neat T-Shirt designs? because if you're talking about identifying criminals its still nowhere near an exact science and depends very greatly on the disposition of prosecution and the care taken during collection as well as a wealth of other environmental factors.
True... a good photo/video (or even credible eye witness) is still a much better identifier than DNA, especially in the minds of most juries.
and we know we can pull out DNA.
dial it back there Kafka. your job is intelligence, not the blanket collection all mankinds genetic marker for some clandestine plot point to a steven king movie. Why do you need this DNA, how are you going to use it, are you even going about this legally?
No, his job is a research biochemist working on extraction of DNA/biological markers from skin as pure research. You are quoting the CEO of the company, not the CIA investors.
I see nothing wrong with his comment. He said nothing to discourage discussing other points, he made his own paid point.
Is it offensive to *you* that some people want to discuss the fact that Apple still makes more on the iPad than all but a few companies in the world do on any of their other products? Revenue dropping from 9 to 7 billion per quarter does in fact mean "Last Change To Save the iPad Line" is a ridiculous troll of a headline.
Yep - CMU, like most Universities these days, are as patent litigation hungry as anyone else...
http://www.post-gazette.com/lo...
But by continually expanding
The number of people a transit system serves is determined by the choices of those people, not the administrators of the system.
It's obviously both, but in this case THEIR wording does refer to the administrators since by "expanding" they mean "adding additional stops". Kind of a "duh" comment, really...
...Samsung didn't completely cripple their amazing hardware with a godawful bastardization of the Android UI...
Easy: recipes can't be copyrighted.
Besides, plagiarism is the *intentional* claim of someone else's work as your own. If you can honestly and thoroughly prove that you didn't take something from someone else, it's not plagiarism (though good luck anyway if it is copyrighted).
Their circulation numbers are as made up as their crossword puzzles;
Wait, I don't get that analogy - does that mean their circulation numbers are stolen from the NY Times?
Or those who get paid to write crosswords and had their stolen...
Both of your scenarios sound absurd to me.
As far as the BFI or anyone else "doctoring" evidence: they would have to have done it *before* it became international news with a case that may end up in the Supreme Court. And even then, given the scrutiny the case has now, if they had done it earlier the chances are WAY more likely than not their deception would be discovered and those doing it caught and prosecuted themselves...
No need to even speculate, it's just absurdity on the surface. A totally non-technical person made up a new "security" term to scare people. If you want to find a link countering it, it's trivial - including quotes from the DA that he made it up...
http://arstechnica.com/tech-po...
Except you are *not* the end user. You are the product. Their ad affiliates are the end user, and they *love* their software.
And working on it "in secret" means they are WAY behind Google. If you aren't using it in public streets with other cars you aren't going to get it right, and google has put way over 1M miles on public streets already.
I seem to see one about every other time I drive through Mountain View these days (and honestly they are kind of a menace on 35 MPH streets like Shoreline or El Camino since they won't go more than 25...)
Sometimes it doesn't pay to be "clever".
Passenger: A person who travels in a conveyance, such as a car or train, without participating in its operation.
Driver != passenger by most definitions, sorry.
If it's anything like the Tesla, they probably run various subsystems on different software, from no OS at all for the low level control systems, to possible simple automotive RTOS (OTEK?) for ECU (not sure if Tesla uses it, but I believe Bosch/BMW does), to Linux for things like infotainment and media consoles...
This is moronic. You know nothing about Google...
assuming the machine has been properly maintained, programmed, and designed.
Obviously, everyone knows this... so what's the point of being pessimistic about it? The modern non-self driving car already requires a ton of maintenance, programming, and design. Bad programming in your car could cause any number of problems anyway.
Big deal, if you read anything about the incident so did the test driver. Sometimes the other cars (or buses) make dick moves and collisions happen...
Your whole premise is silly because we are talking about NORTH KOREA.
1) if NK actually gets anything of a decent size a stable orbit you'd better believe it will be tracked by every country in the world capable of doing so - they'd know exactly where it is and who did it.
2) they can't do #1 right now. And launching an ICBM would be WAY simpler than #1, which was my point.
3) it's basically suicide at a national level if they ACTUALLY do either #1 or #2, so they don't REALLY want to use it, they want to bluster and threaten people with it. In that case they are much better off telling everyone they have a ICBM than that they have a space based nuke, as in the latter case anything NK ever launched into orbit would basically be shot down immediately and without repercussion as it violates international space law.
If that doesn't make sense to you, you should watch Dr. Strangelove... "The whole point of a Doomsday Machine is lost if you keep it a secret! Why didn't you tell the world?"
They don't have to have an ICBM, just get an object into orbit and they can drop it anywhere provided they have enough math skills
Eh... that's basically the definition of ICBM.
I suppose you could argue if they are actually launching a satellite into a stable *orbit* that would eventually drop a nuke with any accuracy it wouldn't technically be ballistic - but in that cast it's an order of magnitude more complex than an ICBM so what's the point...
This year is notable because it will see the first new nuclear plant brought online in 20 years, contributing 1.1 GigaWatts to the grid
How is THAT supposed to get us excited.... it's not even enough to power a single time-traveling DeLorean.