Thousands out of billions is statistically irrelevant. What's your threshold, that my comment receives thousands of likes before taking it seriously? You refuse to consider whether it belongs in social media. I'm not referring to legality. I'm not referring to whether it's nudity. Even the movie Schindler's List was shown uncut with nudity on NBC. But acknowledge that a billion people other than yourself may have other thoughts on the matter. Many use Facebook to keep in touch with friends and family, and don't care for their weird aunt or uncle sharing pics from wartime at the dinner table.
It states in the summary, "If necessary, photos and accounts are reported to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children." So the evidence is being collected and forwarded to the authorities.
Leaving the evidence on Facebook has it's pros and cons. While leaving it on may allow catching others acting on the data, it may also allow children to be further exploited (read: harmed, molested, raped, sold, etc.) before authorities can act. I think being cautious and taking it down can save lives.
Nice strawman. #whataboutism
Let's get serious now. I contend people don't use Facebook with the intent of seeing a photo such as the Napalm Girl. If it got picked up by a nudity filter, that's just fine with many of us. If I want to research the Vietnam War, then sure, pop up that picture in an encyclopedia.
The most important line in the original government post is that they want two Providers, not just two Rockets from one provider. It doesn't matter how many rockets SpaceX has available.
"This award is part of a portfolio of three agreements that leverage commercial launch solutions in order to have at least two domestic, commercial launch service providers that meet National Security Space requirements, including the launch of the heaviest and most complex payloads."
Clown, I use it all day on a single charge. I code for both platforms in C++ and assembly, and the iPhone X CPU performance has yet to be touched by any android, period. Androids overheat and throttle after trying to throw more power at the problem, and come up short, since plastic housings make terrible heat sinks. I love the iPhone X stainless steel and glass construction. Never overheats nor gets hot in my hand.
Those five strap on SRBs do help don't they!
Strap three F9 boosters together to make a Falcon Heavy and you'll get a similar thrust to weight ratio at liftoff. For GEO missions, it's all about minimizing the gravity losses to have as much fuel available in space as possible.
The RD-180 used on Atlas may be the most advanced kerosene fueled rocket engine, but seriously, Atlas and Centaur are behind others in avionics. They do their job well (the ascent) but as the OP stated, it invokes an emotional response that six pieces of suborbital hardware are just going to tumble back to sea at terminal velocity and sink.
I referred to the first chart in my linked source. 3.85 deaths per 100,000 in the U.S. versus 0.07 deaths per 100,000 in the U.K. so I divided 3.85 by 0.07 and arrived at 55 times as many deaths. U.K. deaths are roughly 1 in 1,400,000 whereas U.S. is roughly 1 in 29,000. We're meassuring violent death by gun, not merely being pointed at with a gun. One could say that, in the U.S., the trigger is pulled quite a bit more often.
I also checked my source, and the first chart clearly notes: "All charts exclude deaths in armed conflict and from accidents or self-harm" which means suicide (self-harm) is excluded.
That's why these comparative statistics are handled per 100,000 people. You are 55 times more likely to be a victim of a violent gun death in the U.S. than the U.K.
https://www.npr.org/sections/g...
Reading comprehension has gone to shit lately. Ignore the diagonal constraint for the moment.
I'll presume here that 4K refers to 3840 instead of 4096 given the context.
The first request was for a 16:10 4K display. Rather than 3840x2160, the ask is for 3840x2400.
The second request was for a 4:3 4K display. Rather than 3840x2160, the ask is for 3840x2880.
In both cases, the ask is for more height; not less width. Then, after meeting those pixel requirements, the ask is for it to fit on one's desk. Bezels are different for every monitor. The diagonal measurement also once included (uselessly) the glass behind the bezel. Perhaps a measurement in pixels per inch (or cm) would be best to help set the scale for the display.
So, they banked a lot of money. That does NOT mean that a breakup is warranted. A vast majority of that money was earned selling just one product, the iPhone. Imagine that the iPhone was their only product. How, King Solomon, do you intend to split that baby? If Apple was split, there would still be a sub-company with the iPhone making billions. Splitting Apple has no merit. They make just a few different devices that all work together by running the same software.
I also don't see how splitting Facebook (a social network, of which there are many) is beneficial to anyone. Don't like them? Great! Go to a different website. There's no monopoly here either. They are not stopping anybody from competing on the open net.
The original AC said "3200baud modem". Why is RS-232 port speed now being discussed when the limiting factor was the baud rate and compression over the telco lines?
FWIW, I downloaded the original shareware version of Doom in December of 1993 from an Apogee BBS over a 14400 bps connection. Put it on two 5.25" floppies and under the Christmas tree for my Dad that year.
Backlights of two 20" monitors at full brightness, space heaters, and AC compressors, do not run at zero watts.
You seem concerned only with my 2nd and 3rd bullet items, so the 1st and 4th are substantial enough to be beneficial economically? Excellent!
This is why Tesla did not use the term "tons" during the presentation. They consistently said a gross weight of 80,000 pounds. I did not see "40 tons" until reading slashdot today.
The trick is having engine out capability when landing on empty tanks. F9 lands solely on the center engine. SpaceX identified this as a point of failure. BFS is now expected to have 3 central engines lit for landing (up from 2 stated during the 2017 IAC). If one goes out, easy enough to throttle up the other two. They can run as low as 20% thrust. Is New Glenn still targeting just 7 engines with only 1 near the center? Seems like a similar point of failure.
Disingenuous. The raptor has a higher efficiency by using full flow staged combustion. The current lower output is for two reasons. The first is for optimizing the thrust to weight ratio. Higher thrust engines disproportionately weigh more. The second is multi engine out support. If you have one big engine and it goes down, you crash. If instead you have 3 smaller engines in the same space and 1 goes down, the mission continues on the remaining 2. When landing becomes imperative with lives at stake, I'll take multiple engines over bragging rights.
The GP asserted that if one could fly, one could drive. I merely showed that neither skill-set is a superset of the other. I fully understand an F4 requires harder to acquire skills to operate proficiently; however, that does not translate to an honorary license to drive.
In the case of espionage, if the nav systems are compromised, it would be good to know how to navigate by hand; to know what the computer is automating. Relying solely on the computer to steer the boat is a point of failure. I'm fine with them learning how to navigate manually. If their data contradicts the computer's, then identify which is wrong, and if it's the computer, that's a huge discovery. It's a backup AND check. TFA does not state that the nav systems are being replaced or shut down.
Being able to fly, lead a target, and shoot down a MiG, has no bearing on knowing the rules of the road, being able to shift gears in a standard, hill start, etc. Different skillsets.
The OP has a valid point. If someone is training to get certified and is shadowed by someone who is certified, that's one thing. But if the bridge is filled with people that are not certified, that's a huge breakdown in the chain of command. The gov't spends HOW MUCH money on defense, yet we have untrained people on deck looking after a billion dollar boat? That's not what the taxpayers are expecting.
Slashdot Mirror
Thousands out of billions is statistically irrelevant. What's your threshold, that my comment receives thousands of likes before taking it seriously? You refuse to consider whether it belongs in social media. I'm not referring to legality. I'm not referring to whether it's nudity. Even the movie Schindler's List was shown uncut with nudity on NBC. But acknowledge that a billion people other than yourself may have other thoughts on the matter. Many use Facebook to keep in touch with friends and family, and don't care for their weird aunt or uncle sharing pics from wartime at the dinner table.
It states in the summary, "If necessary, photos and accounts are reported to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children." So the evidence is being collected and forwarded to the authorities.
Leaving the evidence on Facebook has it's pros and cons. While leaving it on may allow catching others acting on the data, it may also allow children to be further exploited (read: harmed, molested, raped, sold, etc.) before authorities can act. I think being cautious and taking it down can save lives.
Nice strawman. #whataboutism
Let's get serious now. I contend people don't use Facebook with the intent of seeing a photo such as the Napalm Girl. If it got picked up by a nudity filter, that's just fine with many of us. If I want to research the Vietnam War, then sure, pop up that picture in an encyclopedia.
No doubt it was tragic what happened to her, but why do we need to see her on Facebook?
M: Yes, but I came here for an argument!!
A: OH! Oh! I'm sorry! This is abuse!
M: Oh! Oh I see!
A: Aha! No, you want room 12A, next door.
"This award is part of a portfolio of three agreements that leverage commercial launch solutions in order to have at least two domestic, commercial launch service providers that meet National Security Space requirements, including the launch of the heaviest and most complex payloads."
https://dod.defense.gov/News/C...
Clown, I use it all day on a single charge. I code for both platforms in C++ and assembly, and the iPhone X CPU performance has yet to be touched by any android, period. Androids overheat and throttle after trying to throw more power at the problem, and come up short, since plastic housings make terrible heat sinks. I love the iPhone X stainless steel and glass construction. Never overheats nor gets hot in my hand.
I'm halfway through Day 2 after charging my iPhone X and the battery is still above 60%.
Those five strap on SRBs do help don't they! Strap three F9 boosters together to make a Falcon Heavy and you'll get a similar thrust to weight ratio at liftoff. For GEO missions, it's all about minimizing the gravity losses to have as much fuel available in space as possible.
The RD-180 used on Atlas may be the most advanced kerosene fueled rocket engine, but seriously, Atlas and Centaur are behind others in avionics. They do their job well (the ascent) but as the OP stated, it invokes an emotional response that six pieces of suborbital hardware are just going to tumble back to sea at terminal velocity and sink.
I referred to the first chart in my linked source. 3.85 deaths per 100,000 in the U.S. versus 0.07 deaths per 100,000 in the U.K. so I divided 3.85 by 0.07 and arrived at 55 times as many deaths. U.K. deaths are roughly 1 in 1,400,000 whereas U.S. is roughly 1 in 29,000. We're meassuring violent death by gun, not merely being pointed at with a gun. One could say that, in the U.S., the trigger is pulled quite a bit more often.
I also checked my source, and the first chart clearly notes: "All charts exclude deaths in armed conflict and from accidents or self-harm" which means suicide (self-harm) is excluded.
That's why these comparative statistics are handled per 100,000 people. You are 55 times more likely to be a victim of a violent gun death in the U.S. than the U.K. https://www.npr.org/sections/g...
Reading comprehension has gone to shit lately. Ignore the diagonal constraint for the moment.
I'll presume here that 4K refers to 3840 instead of 4096 given the context.
The first request was for a 16:10 4K display. Rather than 3840x2160, the ask is for 3840x2400.
The second request was for a 4:3 4K display. Rather than 3840x2160, the ask is for 3840x2880.
In both cases, the ask is for more height; not less width. Then, after meeting those pixel requirements, the ask is for it to fit on one's desk. Bezels are different for every monitor. The diagonal measurement also once included (uselessly) the glass behind the bezel. Perhaps a measurement in pixels per inch (or cm) would be best to help set the scale for the display.
So, they banked a lot of money. That does NOT mean that a breakup is warranted. A vast majority of that money was earned selling just one product, the iPhone. Imagine that the iPhone was their only product. How, King Solomon, do you intend to split that baby? If Apple was split, there would still be a sub-company with the iPhone making billions. Splitting Apple has no merit. They make just a few different devices that all work together by running the same software.
I also don't see how splitting Facebook (a social network, of which there are many) is beneficial to anyone. Don't like them? Great! Go to a different website. There's no monopoly here either. They are not stopping anybody from competing on the open net.
Add reading comprehension to his bucket list.
The original AC said "3200baud modem". Why is RS-232 port speed now being discussed when the limiting factor was the baud rate and compression over the telco lines?
FWIW, I downloaded the original shareware version of Doom in December of 1993 from an Apogee BBS over a 14400 bps connection. Put it on two 5.25" floppies and under the Christmas tree for my Dad that year.
Backlights of two 20" monitors at full brightness, space heaters, and AC compressors, do not run at zero watts. You seem concerned only with my 2nd and 3rd bullet items, so the 1st and 4th are substantial enough to be beneficial economically? Excellent!
All improve the amount of electricity left in the battery packs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
This is why Tesla did not use the term "tons" during the presentation. They consistently said a gross weight of 80,000 pounds. I did not see "40 tons" until reading slashdot today.
The trick is having engine out capability when landing on empty tanks. F9 lands solely on the center engine. SpaceX identified this as a point of failure. BFS is now expected to have 3 central engines lit for landing (up from 2 stated during the 2017 IAC). If one goes out, easy enough to throttle up the other two. They can run as low as 20% thrust. Is New Glenn still targeting just 7 engines with only 1 near the center? Seems like a similar point of failure.
Real men tried, just that little problem of it bursting into flame on contact with the air, and the toxic exhaust.
Disingenuous. The raptor has a higher efficiency by using full flow staged combustion. The current lower output is for two reasons. The first is for optimizing the thrust to weight ratio. Higher thrust engines disproportionately weigh more. The second is multi engine out support. If you have one big engine and it goes down, you crash. If instead you have 3 smaller engines in the same space and 1 goes down, the mission continues on the remaining 2. When landing becomes imperative with lives at stake, I'll take multiple engines over bragging rights.
The GP asserted that if one could fly, one could drive. I merely showed that neither skill-set is a superset of the other. I fully understand an F4 requires harder to acquire skills to operate proficiently; however, that does not translate to an honorary license to drive.
In the case of espionage, if the nav systems are compromised, it would be good to know how to navigate by hand; to know what the computer is automating. Relying solely on the computer to steer the boat is a point of failure. I'm fine with them learning how to navigate manually. If their data contradicts the computer's, then identify which is wrong, and if it's the computer, that's a huge discovery. It's a backup AND check. TFA does not state that the nav systems are being replaced or shut down.
Being able to fly, lead a target, and shoot down a MiG, has no bearing on knowing the rules of the road, being able to shift gears in a standard, hill start, etc. Different skillsets.
The OP has a valid point. If someone is training to get certified and is shadowed by someone who is certified, that's one thing. But if the bridge is filled with people that are not certified, that's a huge breakdown in the chain of command. The gov't spends HOW MUCH money on defense, yet we have untrained people on deck looking after a billion dollar boat? That's not what the taxpayers are expecting.