are a Hollywood invention. If you spend a lot of time making a vehicle indestructible, then figure out a way to easily destroy it with a small device, doesn't that mean you just wasted a lot of time?
As for the SR-71, it's top speed has never been declassified, but assuming a top speed of 3.0, and a flight altitude of 100,000 feet, by the time the missile reaches that altitude, it only has a few miles of operating range left - easy enough to keep away from until it runs out of fuel a few seconds later.
The Air Force is not 'hard at work' developing this craft. It has been in use for at least a decade now. The Aurora was developed in the 80's and 90's. I'm guessing that this is a successor to that vehicle.
The investigation showed that a solder joint between two components had broken, so that current could no longer pass through them. It also showed that the breakage occurs because the solder joint loosens slightly every time the computer is turned on and off.
So, they're asserting that a bad solder joint is the problem? I suppose that this could be a manufacturing defect, but a "design flaw"?
If you fear self-incrimination, that's covered by the 5th amendment, not the first. There is no need for a special class of citizen who has special rights that the rest of us don't have.
I understand the desire of bloggers to be taken seriously as journalists, but these shield laws are insane - for all journalists.
Consider: I videotape my buddy raping a girl, and I publish it on Youtube but I black out his face. What sane society would prevent the cops from locking me up till I produced my buddy's name? Similarly, what if the year is 1970 and I just took notes describing the rape and I published them in some mimeographed pamphlet?
The first amendment is not a blanket for covering up crimes.
There is no constitutional right to obstruct an investigation. Quite the reverse. Journalist shields laws are inane precisely because of cases like this.
What is a journalist? In an era when every single one of us "publishes" online, why aren't we all journalists? Given that we are, by any sane definition, all we have to do whenever subpoenaed is assert our right as journalists to keep our information to ourselves just in case we want to publish them.
Even prior to this era, shield laws created a special, unregulated, class of citizen: "The Journalist." Unlike every other type of American, Journalists are permitted to keep secrets without oversight. While the government is supposed to conduct all it's operations in public, while celebrities have no expectation of privacy whatsoever, while intimate details of all of our lives have alway been available to anyone who wandered down to the county courthouse, we have decided that noble Journalists are uniquely trustworthy and do not require any scrutiny of their motives and actions?
You're right - and I really need to find some way to get back into it soon; are you doing something aerobic between sets, running in place, that sort of thing?
That's the thing - for those of us that don't have a competitive streak and that do not find innate enjoyment in painful muscles, doing one sit-up is pointless...
No, it's not. It gives you the satisfaction of knowing you're less likely to die before your daughter is grown, for example. I don't exercise because I like it, I exercise because I have to, and I've found the least awful way of doing it.
A visit to my son's high school felt like a visit to Junior Weight Watcher's Anonymous. The average kid there was as heavy as I was in high school - and I knew I was heavy, even then.
Fortunately, my son inherited his mother's metabolism. So far, he looks like he's growing up thin. My daughter might be leaning my way, though - she's got good eating habits and she's active, so my fingers are crossed.
I'm also constantly pointing out to them how I have to struggle with my weight and how they don't want to end up like me. Too many people are too damn proud of being fat.
but every school I've encountered recently (via my children) goes to great extremes to eliminate competition and anything else that might damage the self-esteem of the precious little emperors.
It's ridiculous. Trophies for everybody! And it's not like the kids don't realize that the trophies are worthless, either.
They do the same thing in business-based athletics; I went to a martial arts competition where they subdivided the children into so many categories that everyone was guaranteed to finish in the "top 3".
What does it say to someone to give them a 2nd place trophy, when they know that there were only two kids in their classification?
It meant far more to my son that he beat me 5 points to 4 in a sparring match than it did when he came in "2nd" at the region martial arts championships.
I remember reading about one study where they took "naturally thin" people and boosted their caloric intake by an extra 1000 calories per day. The subjects all became much more "twitchy" - they paced, fiddled, shifted, etc.. during their normal day.
The upshot was that after a few months they were predicted to gain 20-30 pounds but gained only 10 pounds on average.
I once managed to lose 95 pounds. Kept it off for several years. For me, the trick that broke the barrier was weight lifting. Diet by itself just made me weaker - I kept the fat and lost muscle. Aerobics boosted my energy levels but didn't burn weight. (Of course, I was so heavy that "aerobics" was barely a mile run).
Weight lifting forced my body to add muscle mass which boosted how many calories I burned during a day. The big problem I have now is that I'm getting older and, frankly, lifting and I don't get along as well as we used to...
Let me make sure I understand this. Your evidence that sports make you lose weight is that you weighed less when you were 17 than you did when you were 22.
Slashdot Mirror
are a Hollywood invention. If you spend a lot of time making a vehicle indestructible, then figure out a way to easily destroy it with a small device, doesn't that mean you just wasted a lot of time?
And then you spout that Mach 4.5 number?
The SA-2 has a maximum range of about 31 miles, a maximum operating altitude of 80,000 ft, and speed of Mach 3.5. It usually carried a high explosive warhead of 287 lbs, though nuclear versions are also known.
As for the SR-71, it's top speed has never been declassified, but assuming a top speed of 3.0, and a flight altitude of 100,000 feet, by the time the missile reaches that altitude, it only has a few miles of operating range left - easy enough to keep away from until it runs out of fuel a few seconds later.
And here's an example of what happens when you try.
that the SR-71 flew over a lot more than Vietnam, and was created in direct response to the U-2 shot down by the USSR?
The soviets tried many times to shoot down the SR-71, but it was simply faster than the missiles.
The investigation showed that a solder joint between two components had broken, so that current could no longer pass through them. It also showed that the breakage occurs because the solder joint loosens slightly every time the computer is turned on and off. So, they're asserting that a bad solder joint is the problem? I suppose that this could be a manufacturing defect, but a "design flaw"?
I'm pretty sure the principal doesn't control the courts or the cops and wasn't the person who decided the boy should be held in jail for 12 days.
of the bump-and-turn cars I played with as a kid.
What makes this a robot instead of a child's toy?
entirely with junk CDs. It was very sparklely.
I bet they direct the thrust to counteract the torque of the motor.
If you fear self-incrimination, that's covered by the 5th amendment, not the first. There is no need for a special class of citizen who has special rights that the rest of us don't have.
I understand the desire of bloggers to be taken seriously as journalists, but these shield laws are insane - for all journalists.
Consider: I videotape my buddy raping a girl, and I publish it on Youtube but I black out his face. What sane society would prevent the cops from locking me up till I produced my buddy's name? Similarly, what if the year is 1970 and I just took notes describing the rape and I published them in some mimeographed pamphlet?
The first amendment is not a blanket for covering up crimes.
There is no constitutional right to obstruct an investigation. Quite the reverse. Journalist shields laws are inane precisely because of cases like this.
What is a journalist? In an era when every single one of us "publishes" online, why aren't we all journalists? Given that we are, by any sane definition, all we have to do whenever subpoenaed is assert our right as journalists to keep our information to ourselves just in case we want to publish them.
Even prior to this era, shield laws created a special, unregulated, class of citizen: "The Journalist." Unlike every other type of American, Journalists are permitted to keep secrets without oversight. While the government is supposed to conduct all it's operations in public, while celebrities have no expectation of privacy whatsoever, while intimate details of all of our lives have alway been available to anyone who wandered down to the county courthouse, we have decided that noble Journalists are uniquely trustworthy and do not require any scrutiny of their motives and actions?
Feh.
It does, it's just stupid - it expands to the maximum size specified by the application, instead of to full screen.
that they have that name?
You're right - and I really need to find some way to get back into it soon; are you doing something aerobic between sets, running in place, that sort of thing?
He's comparing his body state as an adolescent with his body state as an adult. He's an idiot and so are you.
That's the thing - for those of us that don't have a competitive streak and that do not find innate enjoyment in painful muscles, doing one sit-up is pointless...
No, it's not. It gives you the satisfaction of knowing you're less likely to die before your daughter is grown, for example. I don't exercise because I like it, I exercise because I have to, and I've found the least awful way of doing it.
There's nothing more encouraging than doing a couple more sit-ups than you ever did before.
There's nothing more discouraging than watching some shmuck knock off a couple of dozen more than you could ever dream of doing.
A visit to my son's high school felt like a visit to Junior Weight Watcher's Anonymous. The average kid there was as heavy as I was in high school - and I knew I was heavy, even then.
Fortunately, my son inherited his mother's metabolism. So far, he looks like he's growing up thin. My daughter might be leaning my way, though - she's got good eating habits and she's active, so my fingers are crossed.
I'm also constantly pointing out to them how I have to struggle with my weight and how they don't want to end up like me. Too many people are too damn proud of being fat.
but every school I've encountered recently (via my children) goes to great extremes to eliminate competition and anything else that might damage the self-esteem of the precious little emperors.
It's ridiculous. Trophies for everybody! And it's not like the kids don't realize that the trophies are worthless, either.
They do the same thing in business-based athletics; I went to a martial arts competition where they subdivided the children into so many categories that everyone was guaranteed to finish in the "top 3".
What does it say to someone to give them a 2nd place trophy, when they know that there were only two kids in their classification?
It meant far more to my son that he beat me 5 points to 4 in a sparring match than it did when he came in "2nd" at the region martial arts championships.
Any post correcting someone's formatting, grammar or spelling will be hopelessly riddled with formatting, grammar and spelling errors.
I remember reading about one study where they took "naturally thin" people and boosted their caloric intake by an extra 1000 calories per day. The subjects all became much more "twitchy" - they paced, fiddled, shifted, etc.. during their normal day.
The upshot was that after a few months they were predicted to gain 20-30 pounds but gained only 10 pounds on average.
I once managed to lose 95 pounds. Kept it off for several years. For me, the trick that broke the barrier was weight lifting. Diet by itself just made me weaker - I kept the fat and lost muscle. Aerobics boosted my energy levels but didn't burn weight. (Of course, I was so heavy that "aerobics" was barely a mile run).
Weight lifting forced my body to add muscle mass which boosted how many calories I burned during a day. The big problem I have now is that I'm getting older and, frankly, lifting and I don't get along as well as we used to...
Let me make sure I understand this. Your evidence that sports make you lose weight is that you weighed less when you were 17 than you did when you were 22.
I hope you aren't an engineer.
Everybody's favorite computing zombie rises from the grave one more time.
I loved my C64 and my Amigas but, really, isn't this just the retail version of domain squatting?