no, a gag order imposes a penalty on certain speech. You can't stop me from saying what I want, not with a piece of paper and not even at the muzzle of a gun. I'll say what I damn well please.
yes. There's about enough space in front of the podium for half a dozen people to stand. I say, if you're going to make noise in London there are better places to do it, such as right under Nelson's Column in Trafalgar Square (I've done this, I managed to stop traffic and attract the attention of three or four stations' worth of Metropolitan Police officers). You can pack a fair few thousand people in there.
This. Paragraph two of the United States Constitution states, in part, that: "We hold these truths to be self evident: that all men are created equal, that all men are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; among them life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness..."
(damn, my memory's good, that's almost perfect recall. I'm going to leave the punctuation as is)
These are individual rights, not human rights. Individual rights granted by God and only to be taken by God. Human rights is the biggest load of wank ever put to paper. It's designed - ostensibly - as a Statutory protection from the abuses of State but what it actually does is distract us from the individual rights we were born with and have at our disposal until the day we die. In the UK (I'm an Englishman and ashamed) the Human Rights Act 1998 is missing one very important clause: Article 13 as in the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms that guarantees the Right to Effective Remedy. Basically this completely, utterly nerfs the rest of the Act in that the courts up and down the country mention the Human Rights Act and in the same breath dismiss it if it stands in the way of the Rights of the State to do whatever the fuck it wants with no comebacks because they've basically got us all to accept the Human Rights Act as a substitute for Individual Rights which it isn't because it doesn't fucking work. That is the point of rights given by the State: they can also be taken away by the State.
It's about as meaningful a term as the one they use in the UK public family law as a threshold to steal children - "risk of future emotional harm". If you can define "serious emotional distress" in clear legal terms, you should also be capable of defining "risk of future emotional harm" - something no legal entity in the UK has EVER managed to do.
Let's face it, no Government likes it when informed people share their information (that more often than not pulls back the curtain on the blatant criminality perpetrated by Agents of State), backed up with evidence, when all the State has is spin, distraction and empty rhetoric, which very quickly devolves into threats of imprisonment and other deprivations and superinjunctions - which, like Fight Club, I'm not allowed to talk about...
From the OutOfTheLoop subreddit: "...no-one, excluding a select few of the administrative team, knows precisely why/u/chooter was removed as an admin, and that will almost certainly continue to be the case until the admins get their house in order: both parties are at being professional in that they aren't talking about the reasons why it occurred...."
It costs far less in delta-v to lauinch from a site closer to the equator for an equatorial orbit (ie LEO, GSO). Point: Canaveral, being at 28N. NZ is at 42S. There's a bit of a physics cheat being closer to the equator and launching prograde to rotation. At the equator, this amounts to 1,000mph, the advantage diminishing as you go toward either pole. Winner: Canaveral. This advantage negates any advantage launching from closer to the pole for a polar orbit. Winner: Canaveral.
someone want to tell me how launching from NZ, apart from political issues, is in any way advantageous over launching from the US?
(BTW, to keep it in perspective, Baikonur Cosmodrome is at 45N. It suffers from the same DV overhead over Canaveral that a NZ site would, which is one reason the Russian launchers are bloody humungous).
the V-Force was retired with no replacements even planned, never mind implemented. Same as we're seeing now with our carriers. And our combat air wings.
The F22 was briefed as a JSF, it found its niche as a low-return ASF since it *can* supercruise. It can do BVR very well, dogfighting? Hells to the no.
the brief was for a JSF. Jack of all trades, master of none. Supercruise (supersonic without going afterburner), stealth, out-turn everything else with a jet engine, and STOVL. It can do NONE of these apart from an unladen STOVL. For a laden STO it needs a RAMP. It can't even HOVER with a full weapons load.
OK, just in the past SIX YEARS, there have been, to my immediate recollection, THREE fatal shootings on mainland US Navy yards: November 2009: Fort Hood September 2013: Washington March 2014: Norfolk, WV - the World's LARGEST Naval base.
NOT ONLY were those shootings on apparently SECURE installations, they were on installations where apparently only base police were permitted to carry ANY type of firearms. Yet, the perpetrators were able to DRIVE through the gates unchecked and wander the bases with their weapons in FULL OPEN VIEW.
nbody physics is a piece of piss. It only gets complicated when you stop talking about point sources and (as you get in KSP) differential tidal forces acting on each different component of the craft depending on its position relative to every other body and to the parts it's attached to. KSP solves this by cheating it: local physics limit is 2.5km radius from observer and tidal stresses are cancelled by assuming that what gravitational influence acts on one end of the craft is precisely equal to the influence on the other end.
It also doesn't help that the only way Squad could reduce the whole shebang to 2-body physics model was to put the planets on rails and fudge their orbital elements. I'll bet if you popped those rails those planets would fly off in a straight line or fall into the sun.
...that the UK Government has reduced the order for the Naval version of the F35 to just 14 planes from its initial order of 138. To be shared (eventually) between TWO supercarriers! That aren't even BUILT yet!
Wait. Why has the order cost not changed??
Initial order for 138 airframes: $50m each. Just airframes. No support contracts, apparently sometime between 2006 and 2015 we mislaid our mechanical skillset in the Royal Navy and RAF. Maybe they went to Turkey for more secure positions (I hear scrap metal salvage is enjoying a massive boost over there - thank the Royal Navy for that one, who at the behest of the British Government sent our entire combat-ready sea force to be scrapped). Following many revisions and the butchering to nonexistence of our defence capability (we couldn't even launch a tactical nuke at the moment!), we eventually get to... 2015 Procurement (14 airframes (NO ENGINES!) and ongoing support contracts for all aircraft): $131m each + costs for spare parts fabrication -- $15m per engine, sold seperately!
Just in the FIRST YEAR, assuming that each aircraft has ONE hot and one spare engine, the new procurement would cost the SAME as the initial tentative order.
In the 2014 Congressional hearings concerning the F35 cost overruns, it was pointed out that while there was not one single combat-ready airframe in service, the project had ALREADY cost more than the ENTIRE GDP of Australia!
Slashdot Mirror
(I think we just sort of agreed, I'm not sure. Tired.)
no, a gag order imposes a penalty on certain speech. You can't stop me from saying what I want, not with a piece of paper and not even at the muzzle of a gun. I'll say what I damn well please.
Just be sure to pull the trigger.
yes. There's about enough space in front of the podium for half a dozen people to stand. I say, if you're going to make noise in London there are better places to do it, such as right under Nelson's Column in Trafalgar Square (I've done this, I managed to stop traffic and attract the attention of three or four stations' worth of Metropolitan Police officers). You can pack a fair few thousand people in there.
if freedom of speech is the right, then the obligation to accept the consequences of that speech has to go with it.
Which, to any right-minded individual, should make perfect sense.
This. Paragraph two of the United States Constitution states, in part, that: "We hold these truths to be self evident: that all men are created equal, that all men are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; among them life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness..."
(damn, my memory's good, that's almost perfect recall. I'm going to leave the punctuation as is)
These are individual rights, not human rights. Individual rights granted by God and only to be taken by God. Human rights is the biggest load of wank ever put to paper. It's designed - ostensibly - as a Statutory protection from the abuses of State but what it actually does is distract us from the individual rights we were born with and have at our disposal until the day we die. In the UK (I'm an Englishman and ashamed) the Human Rights Act 1998 is missing one very important clause: Article 13 as in the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms that guarantees the Right to Effective Remedy. Basically this completely, utterly nerfs the rest of the Act in that the courts up and down the country mention the Human Rights Act and in the same breath dismiss it if it stands in the way of the Rights of the State to do whatever the fuck it wants with no comebacks because they've basically got us all to accept the Human Rights Act as a substitute for Individual Rights which it isn't because it doesn't fucking work. That is the point of rights given by the State: they can also be taken away by the State.
funny that, by definition you don't own the mortgaged house, the bank does. You're only occupying it and by extension, looking after it for the bank.
It's about as meaningful a term as the one they use in the UK public family law as a threshold to steal children - "risk of future emotional harm". If you can define "serious emotional distress" in clear legal terms, you should also be capable of defining "risk of future emotional harm" - something no legal entity in the UK has EVER managed to do.
political dissenters.
Let's face it, no Government likes it when informed people share their information (that more often than not pulls back the curtain on the blatant criminality perpetrated by Agents of State), backed up with evidence, when all the State has is spin, distraction and empty rhetoric, which very quickly devolves into threats of imprisonment and other deprivations and superinjunctions - which, like Fight Club, I'm not allowed to talk about...
From the OutOfTheLoop subreddit: /u/chooter was removed as an admin, and that will almost certainly continue to be the case until the admins get their house in order: both parties are at being professional in that they aren't talking about the reasons why it occurred...."
"...no-one, excluding a select few of the administrative team, knows precisely why
Take a lesson here, slashdot: stop fucking with the layout!
It costs far less in delta-v to lauinch from a site closer to the equator for an equatorial orbit (ie LEO, GSO). Point: Canaveral, being at 28N. NZ is at 42S.
There's a bit of a physics cheat being closer to the equator and launching prograde to rotation. At the equator, this amounts to 1,000mph, the advantage diminishing as you go toward either pole. Winner: Canaveral.
This advantage negates any advantage launching from closer to the pole for a polar orbit. Winner: Canaveral.
someone want to tell me how launching from NZ, apart from political issues, is in any way advantageous over launching from the US?
(BTW, to keep it in perspective, Baikonur Cosmodrome is at 45N. It suffers from the same DV overhead over Canaveral that a NZ site would, which is one reason the Russian launchers are bloody humungous).
translation: the fab shop can be located on the carrier negating the need for yet another hulk in the fleet for the submarines to protect.
This is about saving money in paying crews, maintaining ships and nerfing the group's speed to that of the slowest boat.
sounds like a subplot for Homeworld.
the 65xx series are still being manufactured. You can get a 40-pin DIL package for change out of thirty Dollars.
the V-Force was retired with no replacements even planned, never mind implemented. Same as we're seeing now with our carriers. And our combat air wings.
...Until your 3-D printed weather deck delaminates.
The F22 was briefed as a JSF, it found its niche as a low-return ASF since it *can* supercruise. It can do BVR very well, dogfighting? Hells to the no.
"Negative, Ghost Rider, the pattern is full."
ooh, let me think... every air war in HISTORY?
that's the GDP of Australia you're talking about, I think it's a bit of a world changer for about twenty three million 'Roos.
the brief was for a JSF. Jack of all trades, master of none. Supercruise (supersonic without going afterburner), stealth, out-turn everything else with a jet engine, and STOVL. It can do NONE of these apart from an unladen STOVL. For a laden STO it needs a RAMP. It can't even HOVER with a full weapons load.
OK, just in the past SIX YEARS, there have been, to my immediate recollection, THREE fatal shootings on mainland US Navy yards:
November 2009: Fort Hood
September 2013: Washington
March 2014: Norfolk, WV - the World's LARGEST Naval base.
NOT ONLY were those shootings on apparently SECURE installations, they were on installations where apparently only base police were permitted to carry ANY type of firearms. Yet, the perpetrators were able to DRIVE through the gates unchecked and wander the bases with their weapons in FULL OPEN VIEW.
nbody physics is a piece of piss. It only gets complicated when you stop talking about point sources and (as you get in KSP) differential tidal forces acting on each different component of the craft depending on its position relative to every other body and to the parts it's attached to. KSP solves this by cheating it: local physics limit is 2.5km radius from observer and tidal stresses are cancelled by assuming that what gravitational influence acts on one end of the craft is precisely equal to the influence on the other end.
It also doesn't help that the only way Squad could reduce the whole shebang to 2-body physics model was to put the planets on rails and fudge their orbital elements. I'll bet if you popped those rails those planets would fly off in a straight line or fall into the sun.
hence why I said "nearly"...
...that the UK Government has reduced the order for the Naval version of the F35 to just 14 planes from its initial order of 138. To be shared (eventually) between TWO supercarriers! That aren't even BUILT yet!
Wait. Why has the order cost not changed??
Initial order for 138 airframes: $50m each. Just airframes. No support contracts, apparently sometime between 2006 and 2015 we mislaid our mechanical skillset in the Royal Navy and RAF. Maybe they went to Turkey for more secure positions (I hear scrap metal salvage is enjoying a massive boost over there - thank the Royal Navy for that one, who at the behest of the British Government sent our entire combat-ready sea force to be scrapped). Following many revisions and the butchering to nonexistence of our defence capability (we couldn't even launch a tactical nuke at the moment!), we eventually get to...
2015 Procurement (14 airframes (NO ENGINES!) and ongoing support contracts for all aircraft): $131m each + costs for spare parts fabrication -- $15m per engine, sold seperately!
Just in the FIRST YEAR, assuming that each aircraft has ONE hot and one spare engine, the new procurement would cost the SAME as the initial tentative order.
In the 2014 Congressional hearings concerning the F35 cost overruns, it was pointed out that while there was not one single combat-ready airframe in service, the project had ALREADY cost more than the ENTIRE GDP of Australia!