Guys, guys, you're using technology as a crutch for cheques.
Ditch the cheques and get with the rest of the world over here in the 21st century with cards and NFC and Paywave and shit.
My bank processes transactions on my debit/credit card in chronological order. If a transaction is delayed - which is pretty rare these days - it's slotted back in at it's correct time when it arrives. They let things slide up to -$500 in my account, after which I get a text message saying "Hey, what's the deal?"
Last time I had a chequebook was in the late 90's , and perhaps it was around then that I last saw someone paying for their groceries with one. It's a needless complication these days and I can't understand why people still cling to them.
Hi there, Tox pusher. Did you not even read the very first few sentences he posted? The one that said : I use Skype because for $15/m I can have unlimitted calling to local numbers in Thailand, from the US. And can make unlimitted US calls, too. Outbound only, inbound costs extra. I have it for my wife.
So you like Tox. That's great. It doesn't have all the features of Skype. Some of that is good (one-click government eavesdropping) some of that is bad (POTS integration). And yes, one of the 'features' of Skype is the fact that it's got a very large user base. So you're not just convincing Grandma to swap over, you need to convince Grandma's friends that she also talks to, and so on and so forth. And they just don't see the need for 'secure encrypted communication that only they have the keys to'. They're just (mostly) talking shit and waving to each other.
Open your eyes a bit and admit those problems, and people will start taking your opinion more seriously. Tox may be a solution for you (and maybe me, it looks interesting), but it's not a solution for the masses, because they already have an adequate solution.
He didn't cause the delay. If you build systems for normal users, you have to expect them to make errors, and the system has to catch those errors and handle them in a non-fatal way. If it doesn't, your system is broken.
To be fair, Sydney Airport processed 37.9 million passengers in 2013, so one or two people mucking it up ain't too bad.
And there are certainly a lot of gushing reviews and no shortage of hype.
The crotchety old man in me wonders precisely what we're going to use it for again? Apart from teh awesome!1! games.......
And with regards to old-school slashdot, need we bring up CmdrTaco's review of the iPod? There's been plenty of hatin' round these parts going on for decades now.
Could have bonded a couple of millimetres thickness onto each alloy wheel. It seems the wheels only break when they have no cushioning underneath them, then the point loads on the tread are too high.
Still unsure as to why they didn't go with polyurethane or hard plastic wheels or similar. Probably about the same weight as the alloy ones, much less susceptible to fatigue.
Might be hard to find something that's good for those temperatures, but surely not that hard. Or were they expecting more sandy areas?
Bitscope Micro - USB , 40MS/s, USD95 in quantities of 10 or more.
Fairly decent set of software tools for it (including a basic FFT spectrum analyser and a protocol decoder that can do UART / SPI / Canbus.) Software runs on windows/linux and Raspberry Pi - You can download the software and tinker with a few bitscopes that are online to get a feel for it.
"HD Verified" sounds suspiciously like a way to extract more money out of someone.
"Oh, you want to watch youtube? No, no, your standard account doesn't have that level of service.You need to get a Youtube HD Verified account. Only $9.95 a month extra!"
It communicates to both cars and tells them to execute emergency maneouvers to make enough room. Failing that,, all three calculate a vector that imparts minimal g-forces to all occupants.
I can't even think of a movie (other than Gravity) that did this correctly.
'2001' did. When HAL went and cut Frank Poole's airline during his EVA, his death was shown completely silently and I think it had a far greater impact as a result.
Recovery of the booster would have been nice for investigation, but it was never intended to be flown again and was never the stated goal. The goal for that mission was a controlled descent and touch down on the ocean, which they accomplished. A 'soft-recover' wasn't the term that they were using.
This goal needed to be reached so that Range Safety at the launch pad can determine that SpaceX can reliably put a rocket down within a mile or so of a target. The next launch - in the next week or so - will attempt to land in the ocean much closer to the launch facility.
The technical difficulties of a soft landing are considerable given the hardware that they've got. With the weight of the empty booster, they can't throttle the engines back far enough to hover. So they fall towards the surface and at the right moment fire the engines to reach a computed zero velocity at touchdown. Doing this with gusty 30-40 knot winds on the surface is tough. 'Landing' on a continuously-undulating surface where there is no consistent level is tougher.
And yes, parts of this have been done before. Sure, there's open-source avionics stacks that can do this thing no problemo. But a controlled return of the first stage of a liquid fuel rocket has never been done before, and this kind of work has most certainly never been done for the relatively tiny amount of money that SpaceX has been spending. *That* is the thing that's getting tongues wagging.
- Cars don't have the long wiring needed to effectively 'pick up' EMP. - Cars have a lot of 'passive' components that can help clamp EMP to a survivable level, most notably the battery which can deal with all sorts of spikes and has fairly heavy gauge wiring to the engine computer (for fuel injection) - Cars are also quite well shielded (they're mostly a metallic faraday cage) - Cars deal with lots of EMP as an everyday occurrence (10,000 ignition pulses at 80+kV in the engine bay every minute)
I won't say it's not an issue, but it's not a big an issue as you believe.
Re:How long before the FAA stops this?
on
Drones On Demand
·
· Score: 2
That's a little odd. CASA here in Australia has authoritah over most aerial devices and imposes a licensing arrangement (for those using them in a commercial manner) and a restriction that they have to maintain at least 30 metres from people.
Someone in a triathlon got whacked in the head just recently with a drone - the person flying it will be in a world of hurt once CASA finishes discussions with them.
Note that if it had been some kid fooling about in the park CASA would not have been interested, but once it becomes 'for profit', they start to take notice. Which is probably a reasonable distinction to take - 'for profit' types will generally be using more of them, more often, and licensing requirements can also mandate that they have adequate insurance and minimum safety requirements.
So the entire worlds output of nuclear power is.000000372 ExaWatt Hours.
No, that's just Exawatts. You need to multiply it by the runtime per year, which you can comfortably call 8500 hours, allowing for downtime. So that makes it 3.16 ExaWatt-hours, which is just about a third of oil's output, but you can still have oil for mobile transport for quite a while and flip all the power plants to nuclear, that would certainly help,.
Oh, and perhaps you should consider smoking less crack. Or posting to Slashdot whilst under the effects of said crack. Or both.
Ash = ash. Coal ash is different from volcanic ash.
I used to do ash analysis on coal samples - coal ash is pushing 95% silica and alumina. The rest of the elemental analysis are trace elements, which can be made to sound super-scary when you scale up the quantities to thousands of tons. OMG! There's 100,000 pounds of this KILLER element released! Yes, but it's spread out evenly though 10 million tons of slurry over 100 square miles. You could probably strip-mine the top 5 feet of the same area in a city and find higher concentrations.
The biggest problem is not all the toxic waste, it's all the bloody inert sludge that's everywhere.
It seems that the quantity of fuel required to fly an nearly empty 1st stage is negligable. That is, the amount that they normally leave behind as reserve in case of issues getting to orbit is enough for the 1st stage to land with - you basically just fall/parachute as far as you dare and then fire the engines at the last second to steady/cushion the landing.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, but you can't sell *that* on The Shopping Network, can you?
Guys, guys, you're using technology as a crutch for cheques.
Ditch the cheques and get with the rest of the world over here in the 21st century with cards and NFC and Paywave and shit.
My bank processes transactions on my debit/credit card in chronological order. If a transaction is delayed - which is pretty rare these days - it's slotted back in at it's correct time when it arrives. They let things slide up to -$500 in my account, after which I get a text message saying "Hey, what's the deal?"
Last time I had a chequebook was in the late 90's , and perhaps it was around then that I last saw someone paying for their groceries with one. It's a needless complication these days and I can't understand why people still cling to them.
Hi there, Tox pusher. Did you not even read the very first few sentences he posted? The one that said :
I use Skype because for $15/m I can have unlimitted calling to local numbers in Thailand, from the US. And can make unlimitted US calls, too. Outbound only, inbound costs extra. I have it for my wife.
So you like Tox. That's great. It doesn't have all the features of Skype. Some of that is good (one-click government eavesdropping) some of that is bad (POTS integration). And yes, one of the 'features' of Skype is the fact that it's got a very large user base. So you're not just convincing Grandma to swap over, you need to convince Grandma's friends that she also talks to, and so on and so forth. And they just don't see the need for 'secure encrypted communication that only they have the keys to'. They're just (mostly) talking shit and waving to each other.
Open your eyes a bit and admit those problems, and people will start taking your opinion more seriously. Tox may be a solution for you (and maybe me, it looks interesting), but it's not a solution for the masses, because they already have an adequate solution.
It's pretty simple. One of them has to find and kill the other.
There can be only one.
Have you got a lisp? Because "90th" sure sounds like one.
It's 'nineties' (90's) , not 'nineteeth' (90th) :-P
He didn't cause the delay. If you build systems for normal users, you have to expect them to make errors, and the system has to catch those errors and handle them in a non-fatal way. If it doesn't, your system is broken.
To be fair, Sydney Airport processed 37.9 million passengers in 2013, so one or two people mucking it up ain't too bad.
And there are certainly a lot of gushing reviews and no shortage of hype.
The crotchety old man in me wonders precisely what we're going to use it for again? Apart from teh awesome!1! games.......
And with regards to old-school slashdot, need we bring up CmdrTaco's review of the iPod? There's been plenty of hatin' round these parts going on for decades now.
Did you care to read the link, which said things such as excellent resistance to UV and cosmic radiation?
Anyhoo, I guess it's an iterative process. Better wheels on the next one please guys.
Ultra low temperature silicon rubber springs to mind.
Could have bonded a couple of millimetres thickness onto each alloy wheel. It seems the wheels only break when they have no cushioning underneath them, then the point loads on the tread are too high.
Oh well, I guess they'll know for next time :-)
Still unsure as to why they didn't go with polyurethane or hard plastic wheels or similar. Probably about the same weight as the alloy ones, much less susceptible to fatigue.
Might be hard to find something that's good for those temperatures, but surely not that hard. Or were they expecting more sandy areas?
And binoculars, for that matter.
Bitscope Micro - USB , 40MS/s, USD95 in quantities of 10 or more.
Fairly decent set of software tools for it (including a basic FFT spectrum analyser and a protocol decoder that can do UART / SPI / Canbus.) Software runs on windows/linux and Raspberry Pi - You can download the software and tinker with a few bitscopes that are online to get a feel for it.
Specs here
Either that or they're using high-compression spread-spectrum data streams and it's all just slightly different noise underneath the noise.
Or we could just, like, not bother.
"HD Verified" sounds suspiciously like a way to extract more money out of someone.
"Oh, you want to watch youtube? No, no, your standard account doesn't have that level of service.You need to get a Youtube HD Verified account. Only $9.95 a month extra!"
We built a couple, with the Brits. Decided to leave those things alone.
Parts of Maralinga are still a little on the warm side because of it, so you'd think it would make a good place to store your waste.....
It communicates to both cars and tells them to execute emergency maneouvers to make enough room. Failing that,, all three calculate a vector that imparts minimal g-forces to all occupants.
I can't even think of a movie (other than Gravity) that did this correctly.
'2001' did. When HAL went and cut Frank Poole's airline during his EVA, his death was shown completely silently and I think it had a far greater impact as a result.
You seem a little harsh on them.
Recovery of the booster would have been nice for investigation, but it was never intended to be flown again and was never the stated goal. The goal for that mission was a controlled descent and touch down on the ocean, which they accomplished. A 'soft-recover' wasn't the term that they were using.
This goal needed to be reached so that Range Safety at the launch pad can determine that SpaceX can reliably put a rocket down within a mile or so of a target. The next launch - in the next week or so - will attempt to land in the ocean much closer to the launch facility.
The technical difficulties of a soft landing are considerable given the hardware that they've got. With the weight of the empty booster, they can't throttle the engines back far enough to hover. So they fall towards the surface and at the right moment fire the engines to reach a computed zero velocity at touchdown. Doing this with gusty 30-40 knot winds on the surface is tough. 'Landing' on a continuously-undulating surface where there is no consistent level is tougher.
And yes, parts of this have been done before. Sure, there's open-source avionics stacks that can do this thing no problemo. But a controlled return of the first stage of a liquid fuel rocket has never been done before, and this kind of work has most certainly never been done for the relatively tiny amount of money that SpaceX has been spending. *That* is the thing that's getting tongues wagging.
- Cars don't have the long wiring needed to effectively 'pick up' EMP.
- Cars have a lot of 'passive' components that can help clamp EMP to a survivable level, most notably the battery which can deal with all sorts of spikes and has fairly heavy gauge wiring to the engine computer (for fuel injection)
- Cars are also quite well shielded (they're mostly a metallic faraday cage)
- Cars deal with lots of EMP as an everyday occurrence (10,000 ignition pulses at 80+kV in the engine bay every minute)
I won't say it's not an issue, but it's not a big an issue as you believe.
That's a little odd. CASA here in Australia has authoritah over most aerial devices and imposes a licensing arrangement (for those using them in a commercial manner) and a restriction that they have to maintain at least 30 metres from people.
Someone in a triathlon got whacked in the head just recently with a drone - the person flying it will be in a world of hurt once CASA finishes discussions with them.
Note that if it had been some kid fooling about in the park CASA would not have been interested, but once it becomes 'for profit', they start to take notice. Which is probably a reasonable distinction to take - 'for profit' types will generally be using more of them, more often, and licensing requirements can also mandate that they have adequate insurance and minimum safety requirements.
So the entire worlds output of nuclear power is .000000372 ExaWatt Hours.
No, that's just Exawatts. You need to multiply it by the runtime per year, which you can comfortably call 8500 hours, allowing for downtime. So that makes it 3.16 ExaWatt-hours, which is just about a third of oil's output, but you can still have oil for mobile transport for quite a while and flip all the power plants to nuclear, that would certainly help,.
Oh, and perhaps you should consider smoking less crack. Or posting to Slashdot whilst under the effects of said crack. Or both.
The exchanges dying is good for bitcoin, because the bad ones will be replaced by more solid and upright entities.
You hope.
Ash = ash.
Coal ash is different from volcanic ash.
I used to do ash analysis on coal samples - coal ash is pushing 95% silica and alumina. The rest of the elemental analysis are trace elements, which can be made to sound super-scary when you scale up the quantities to thousands of tons. OMG! There's 100,000 pounds of this KILLER element released! Yes, but it's spread out evenly though 10 million tons of slurry over 100 square miles. You could probably strip-mine the top 5 feet of the same area in a city and find higher concentrations.
The biggest problem is not all the toxic waste, it's all the bloody inert sludge that's everywhere.
It seems that the quantity of fuel required to fly an nearly empty 1st stage is negligable. That is, the amount that they normally leave behind as reserve in case of issues getting to orbit is enough for the 1st stage to land with - you basically just fall/parachute as far as you dare and then fire the engines at the last second to steady/cushion the landing.