The problem with cell phones on an aircraft has very little to do with flight control systems. Interference is probably possible, but I don't think it has ever been documented.
When you're standing on the ground, your cell phone (usually) connects to one or two transmitters that are fairly nearby. You obviously don't need exact line-of-sight, but general-direction-of-sight is necessary for reception. This is how the system was designed to operate.
When you're in a plane at FL330, you're line-of-sight to a very large numbers of transmitters. Making a call in this circumstance would essentially DoS the mobile network by sending traffic through all of these transmitters at once. And since your cell phone broadcasts plenty of identifying information to these transmitters, I don't recommend trying this:)
Bush wasn't elected. He was appointed by the judicial system. If Bush's presidency marked the end of the Microsoft case, the judicial system did NOT work.
I took Okasaki's Software Engineering class at Columbia in 2001. He is a phenominal professor, but Software Engineering is clearly not his primary interest.
In hindsight, I wish I had taken Programming Languages and Translators with Okasaki, and Software Engineering with the parent poster.
Everything but the power supply? When I see an x86 box that experiences inexplicable hard lockups, the power supply is the FIRST thing I check, and that's the solution almost half the time. Understandably, I found your post highly amusing.
The Jews get so much attention because they are much more than 2% of the population of states like CA and NY, and they vote in much greater proportion than the population at large. The voting population of a place like Manhattan is probably closer to 15% Jewish, and 15% of a voting population is worthy of attention.
Israel gets so much attention because the religious Christians know what will happen to their holy sites if the Palestinians control it, and the Christian right has a stranglehold on the US government.
In the US, it's only the Republicans who are unquestioningly pro-Israel. Almost all Democrats are pro-Palestinian, more than half are anti-Israel, and a couple (Al Sharpton comes to mind) are anti-Semetic.
If the Republicans don't manage to fix the 2004 elections, there may not BE an Israel for Microsoft to get shafted by for much longer. And once Israel is out of the way, the Muslim extremists will come after the US in much greater force.
No, the US's poilicy is never to negotiate with terrorists. In Israel it's the other way around; the terrorists' policy is never to negotiate with Israel.
Re:Put the Mudslums in camps - nat'l alert is rais
on
USB Menorah
·
· Score: 1
Many Orthodox Jews in the 20s were strongly against Zionism, because they were waiting for Israel to be given to them by God, and the vast majority of non-Orthodox Jews were against Zionism until the 40s because they were citizens of their home countries (Germany, Poland) and had no intention of leaving. It was only when Jews could no longer live in Eastern Europe (where the majority lived before WW2) that Zionism gained any sort of acceptence in mainstream Judaism.
It's kind of like how the Palestinian Liberation Organization was only formed after Egypt realized that the Arab countries in the Middle East couldn't get rid of Israel by traditional military force.
Er, no. Concorde flew above 60,000 feet, where air resistance is much less than the customary 35,000 feet. Concorde was just as a fuel-efficient cruiser as subsonic planes; trouble is, it sucked 25% of it's fuel on take-off...
Um, no. Concorde was assigned a block cruise altitude of 50,000-60,000 feet. Also, it used a LOT more fuel during cruise than normal planes, because of the afterburners. Think before you post.
The *bullshit* of "they should just move to another arab country" is as acceptable as someone telling a Jew that they have as much claim to the land of Israel as the roman/ottoman/british/etc empires that have occupied it in more recent times
The claim that "they should just move to another Arab country" IS bullshit. But the claim Israel is making is that they should move back to the Arab countries they were living in before they decided to try to ethnically clense the Middle East.
Defending your own country against and invader (please check it for yourself - that's what Israel is) is not "terrorism".
Please check your history before you post. The Palestinians did not come into existence until 16 years after the British handed over 1/3 of what the UN resolution required to form present-day Israel. The creation of the Palestinians was a response to Egypt and Syria realizing that they couldn't destroy Israel by military force. Since the Palestinians didn't exist when Israel invaded, Israel is not an invader.
Furthermore, purposely attacking civilians is a war crime, and therefore is terrorism even if you are being invaded.
For the US citizens: If Mexico invades Texas, you're allowed to defen yourselves without Mexico calling you terrorists.
This is also incorrect. Since George Bush was elected governor of Texas, and he is a terrorist, the Mexicans can call Texans terrorists whether or not they are defending themselves from invasions.
Of course, socialists and Bush-bashers are going to hate this on principal, but I think most of us can see the positive conotations such a law has.
Hey! I'm a Bush-basher, and I think this is a great law. It's what we've all been saying on slashdot for years: don't write new laws for the internet, reuse existing ones.
Although there may be a small risk of a cell phone interfering with an airplane's avionics, the people complaining about cell phone use on airplanes are at the FCC, not the FAA.
See, when you're on the ground, your cell phone picks up one or two signals that have line-of-sight to where you're standing. This is how the system is designed. But at FL330, you're going to be in line-of-sight for many, many signals, and your phone will connect to all of them, essentially DoSing the cellular network. And since your cell phone transmits all sorts of identifying information when you use it, it's fairly simple to track you down.
(citation: Say Again Please: Guide to Radio Communications by Bob Gardner. Can't remember the page number ottomh)
In stud or draw a flush is a very strong hand -- but in Hold 'Em it's not all that rare to see a showdown with two or three flushes in the same suit.
Or, like I hand I saw recently, three flushes in the same suit that all get cracked by a full house when the board pairs on the river. A computer is much more likely to see that coming than those poor Atlantic City tourists:)
Slashdot Mirror
Even a 152 is too big for a Sport Pilot. They're talking about things like Piper Cubs.
Get high profile spammers to send out bulk emails critical of the Church of Scientology, and watch them sue each other to death.
The problem with cell phones on an aircraft has very little to do with flight control systems. Interference is probably possible, but I don't think it has ever been documented.
:)
When you're standing on the ground, your cell phone (usually) connects to one or two transmitters that are fairly nearby. You obviously don't need exact line-of-sight, but general-direction-of-sight is necessary for reception. This is how the system was designed to operate.
When you're in a plane at FL330, you're line-of-sight to a very large numbers of transmitters. Making a call in this circumstance would essentially DoS the mobile network by sending traffic through all of these transmitters at once. And since your cell phone broadcasts plenty of identifying information to these transmitters, I don't recommend trying this
Pay a prolific spammer to send out a bulk message that is severely critical of the Church of Scientology.
Now that's a fight I'd LOVE to see.
Interesting. It isn't like Boeing or Airbus to be so interoperative.
I've got nothing whatsoever against the A340. But the wireless technology in question is made by Boeing. That's a problem.
Check the Luftansa timetable... there's only one nonstop from MUC to LAX each day, and it's on an Airbus A340.
Bush wasn't elected. He was appointed by the judicial system. If Bush's presidency marked the end of the Microsoft case, the judicial system did NOT work.
I took Okasaki's Software Engineering class at Columbia in 2001. He is a phenominal professor, but Software Engineering is clearly not his primary interest.
In hindsight, I wish I had taken Programming Languages and Translators with Okasaki, and Software Engineering with the parent poster.
Everything but the power supply? When I see an x86 box that experiences inexplicable hard lockups, the power supply is the FIRST thing I check, and that's the solution almost half the time. Understandably, I found your post highly amusing.
The Jews get so much attention because they are much more than 2% of the population of states like CA and NY, and they vote in much greater proportion than the population at large. The voting population of a place like Manhattan is probably closer to 15% Jewish, and 15% of a voting population is worthy of attention.
Israel gets so much attention because the religious Christians know what will happen to their holy sites if the Palestinians control it, and the Christian right has a stranglehold on the US government.
In the US, it's only the Republicans who are unquestioningly pro-Israel. Almost all Democrats are pro-Palestinian, more than half are anti-Israel, and a couple (Al Sharpton comes to mind) are anti-Semetic.
If the Republicans don't manage to fix the 2004 elections, there may not BE an Israel for Microsoft to get shafted by for much longer. And once Israel is out of the way, the Muslim extremists will come after the US in much greater force.
No, the US's poilicy is never to negotiate with terrorists. In Israel it's the other way around; the terrorists' policy is never to negotiate with Israel.
Many Orthodox Jews in the 20s were strongly against Zionism, because they were waiting for Israel to be given to them by God, and the vast majority of non-Orthodox Jews were against Zionism until the 40s because they were citizens of their home countries (Germany, Poland) and had no intention of leaving. It was only when Jews could no longer live in Eastern Europe (where the majority lived before WW2) that Zionism gained any sort of acceptence in mainstream Judaism.
It's kind of like how the Palestinian Liberation Organization was only formed after Egypt realized that the Arab countries in the Middle East couldn't get rid of Israel by traditional military force.
Er, no. Concorde flew above 60,000 feet, where air resistance is much less than the customary 35,000 feet. Concorde was just as a fuel-efficient cruiser as subsonic planes; trouble is, it sucked 25% of it's fuel on take-off...
Um, no. Concorde was assigned a block cruise altitude of 50,000-60,000 feet. Also, it used a LOT more fuel during cruise than normal planes, because of the afterburners. Think before you post.
The claim that "they should just move to another Arab country" IS bullshit. But the claim Israel is making is that they should move back to the Arab countries they were living in before they decided to try to ethnically clense the Middle East.
Anti-Semites are the only ones who consider Jews to be a single ethnic group.
Did you know there are European Jews? Middle Eastern Jews? Indian Jews? African Jews?
Did you know that some people converted to Judaism? You can't convert to an ethnicity (unless you're Michael Jackson).
Please check your history before you post. The Palestinians did not come into existence until 16 years after the British handed over 1/3 of what the UN resolution required to form present-day Israel. The creation of the Palestinians was a response to Egypt and Syria realizing that they couldn't destroy Israel by military force. Since the Palestinians didn't exist when Israel invaded, Israel is not an invader.
Furthermore, purposely attacking civilians is a war crime, and therefore is terrorism even if you are being invaded.
For the US citizens: If Mexico invades Texas, you're allowed to defen yourselves without Mexico calling you terrorists.
This is also incorrect. Since George Bush was elected governor of Texas, and he is a terrorist, the Mexicans can call Texans terrorists whether or not they are defending themselves from invasions.
They're probably going to claim the code was inserted by the Israeli army or something.
Um. DeCSS was ruled illegal. You can't even link to it.
Good thing VA Tech got their 1100 before all of the full-price-paying customers who ordered these as soon as they were announced.
Of course, socialists and Bush-bashers are going to hate this on principal, but I think most of us can see the positive conotations such a law has.
Hey! I'm a Bush-basher, and I think this is a great law. It's what we've all been saying on slashdot for years: don't write new laws for the internet, reuse existing ones.
No. Try causing to happen.
Although there may be a small risk of a cell phone interfering with an airplane's avionics, the people complaining about cell phone use on airplanes are at the FCC, not the FAA.
See, when you're on the ground, your cell phone picks up one or two signals that have line-of-sight to where you're standing. This is how the system is designed. But at FL330, you're going to be in line-of-sight for many, many signals, and your phone will connect to all of them, essentially DoSing the cellular network. And since your cell phone transmits all sorts of identifying information when you use it, it's fairly simple to track you down.
(citation: Say Again Please: Guide to Radio Communications by Bob Gardner. Can't remember the page number ottomh)
Or, like I hand I saw recently, three flushes in the same suit that all get cracked by a full house when the board pairs on the river. A computer is much more likely to see that coming than those poor Atlantic City tourists
*thanks God I folded before the flop*