What the hell do people see in the N900 - I had one, my wife had one and we both hated it (but for different reasons). It was flimsy, slow and buggy - what am I missing that other people got?
Except that the USAF is not looking for a new developed aircraft for the Talon replacement, they want off the shelf solutions and the leading contenders have all got years of service already behind them.
"It will also be designed for a 20th century mindset where human pilots actually flew the planes." - well, thats going to be the case regardless, because the USAF are looking to keep manned aircraft around for the forseeable future in the F-22 and F-35, so of course they are going to need something to act as a LIFT for those platforms...
All the Talons are getting to the end of their service life, which means you either push them through a very costly life extension program, or you replace them.
All of the Talon replacements are off-the-shelf systems, with little to no custom development required, and all are proven platforms (with one already being in USN service) so the cost for replacement is likely to be very manageable.
So don't discount the fact that they are being replaced, its going to happen.
The T-X replacement program is currently in the pre-RFP stage, but replacement is expected within the next decade, so why are they even bothering to spend money on such an upgrade?
No, Parliament cannot elect a Prime Minister, that is solely down to the government (the majority party), as is calling an election (the majority party or the Queen) - in both cases it is an internal party matter, the opposition parties do not have any involvement.
Votes don't translate into prime ministerial selection, it's the Queen who picks who should be prime minister and who should form a government - there is nothing in our voting process that says a certain person should become PM upon election, although there is a tradition that says that the leader of the party with the majority in the House of Commons that will be the one that the Queen asks to form a Government.
The U-2 was shot down several times - you are only thinking of the Powers shoot down, while infact there were several shoot downs of Taiwanese U-2s as well.
Won't the value of the company drop as a result of any transfer of compensation from the company to someone else? That $74Million would have to come from somewhere if it was cash rather than stock options.
The toss up is whether the person you are compensating was responsible in whole or in part for bringing in more than their compensation package as revenue...
If they come from a company retained pool, that company retained pool would be an asset on the companies balance sheet. So taking it from there lowers the company's value by 76M
From the Oracle financial report, last page:
Stock-based compensation expenses: We have excluded the effect of stock-based compensation expenses from our non-GAAP operating expenses and net income measures. Although stock-based compensation is a key incentive offered to our employees, and we believe such compensation contributed to the revenues earned during the periods presented and also believe it will contribute to the generation of future period revenues, we continue to evaluate our business performance excluding stock-based compensation expenses. Stock-based compensation expenses will recur in future periods
However, they are detailed in the Stock Holding Pattern filings, which show as of September 2013 74.98% of the company is held by the company, and 25.02% of the company is held publicly (which is an increase of 0.01 percentage points since June 2013).
You might indeed be able to fork the OS, but you also would have to go your own way with an earlier version of the SDK, or build your own, as clause 3.4 of the Android SDK license says:
3.4 You agree that you will not take any actions that may cause or result in the fragmentation of Android, including but not limited to distributing, participating in the creation of, or promoting in any way a software development kit derived from the SDK.
That depends on how the stock is issued - from a non-issued pool (has 100% of Oracle shares already been issued publicly, or did the company retain a pool) or through a new issue? If the former, no dilution happens.
Great. Are you advocating an intelligence test before your Google Glass is shipped to you? Should Google Glass issue an intelligence test before it allows you to drive with it on?
Or are you saying that only "intelligent" people of the right type would dare drive with Google Glass?
1. Military pilots (and pilots in general) get a HECK of a lot more training than any person driving on the public road does, including a massive amount of training to handle that helmet mounted display without distraction. When Google Glass comes with a 6 month intensive training course to allow you to drive with it, then you can make that comparison.
2. There's a lot less to run into in the air, even when flying in tight formation.
Would that be the same Boeing who took confidential and NDAed Airbus information off of a DoD contract negotiator and then gave her a job after she awarded the contract to Boeing? You know, the scandal that started the whole KC-135 replacement bullshit which has been ongoing for over a decade now. I seem to remember that multiple people ended up in jail over that one...
Airbus including in a presentation slides that are marked "BOEING PROPRIETARY" means nothing - you can stamp all sorts on documents, doesn't mean shit.
If automobile crashes were investigated like aircraft crashes were, then yes you most certainly would get descriptive phrases for what occurs - was that collision with the tree controlled or uncontrolled (Controlled Drive Into Terrain or Uncontrolled Drive Into Terrain)?
There is a reason these terms are used - a phrase like "unscheduled landing" allows airline staff to discuss the issue openly without the potential of raising alarm in those around them, which they may very well have to do in many circumstances, even when there might be relatives standing next to them. You do *not* want to use the term "crashed" when you do not have any more information other than the aircraft is on the ground somewhere.
In the Hudson landing case, there were four airfields in the surrounding area, all within reasonable flight time for the incident if you weren't in the cockpit and thus didn't know the full extent of the issue - the initial incident was a bird strike, so he could have diverted to any one of those airports and it wouldn't have been a crash at all, it would have indeed been an "unscheduled landing" or a "diversion" - you have no idea when all the airline staff get told what happens, so to them its an "unscheduled landing" for as long as it needs to be.
Determining whether the landing was controlled or not puts massive emphasis on what went wrong - did the pilots actually fly the aircraft into the ground? Why? Were they dealing with an issue and not notice the hill infront of them (its happened on several occasions)? Were they unconscious at the time? Why were they unconscious? Why did they not notice?
Why did that car driver drive the car into the lake? Was it a controlled action? Was he drunk? Or was it uncontrolled? Was he asleep? Did the vehicles instrumentation confuse him in some way?
Not so ridiculous when you know why such terminology is in common usage...
Yeah, great, so there are multiple terms for the same thing.
Its also called a CFIT - Controlled Flight Into Terrain. "Crash" is the most generic phrase you can boil it down to, while the others are more descriptive.
Nice ramble, but tell me the last time POTUS or the Speaker or the Joint Chiefs picked up a weapon in anger rather than sending someone else to fight the actual battle? Someone else who is typically less educated, less well off than themselves?
Out of interest, what did he whistleblow? I thought he just decided that access to a particular journel or somethign was too expensive and decided to download and distribute as much as he cold get his hands on?
Having SSL key access means they can capture stuff in transit, which means that either the end user key or the plain text decrypted email must be in transit... So, where is it transiting to and from? Or we're the FBI injecting something onto the page during transit to capture stuff in the users browser?
Does Lavabit do the decryption on the client end, or does the client send their key to the server? What exactly is going on?
Slashdot Mirror
What the hell do people see in the N900 - I had one, my wife had one and we both hated it (but for different reasons). It was flimsy, slow and buggy - what am I missing that other people got?
Except that the USAF is not looking for a new developed aircraft for the Talon replacement, they want off the shelf solutions and the leading contenders have all got years of service already behind them.
"It will also be designed for a 20th century mindset where human pilots actually flew the planes." - well, thats going to be the case regardless, because the USAF are looking to keep manned aircraft around for the forseeable future in the F-22 and F-35, so of course they are going to need something to act as a LIFT for those platforms...
All the Talons are getting to the end of their service life, which means you either push them through a very costly life extension program, or you replace them.
All of the Talon replacements are off-the-shelf systems, with little to no custom development required, and all are proven platforms (with one already being in USN service) so the cost for replacement is likely to be very manageable.
So don't discount the fact that they are being replaced, its going to happen.
The T-X replacement program is currently in the pre-RFP stage, but replacement is expected within the next decade, so why are they even bothering to spend money on such an upgrade?
No, Parliament cannot elect a Prime Minister, that is solely down to the government (the majority party), as is calling an election (the majority party or the Queen) - in both cases it is an internal party matter, the opposition parties do not have any involvement.
Votes don't translate into prime ministerial selection, it's the Queen who picks who should be prime minister and who should form a government - there is nothing in our voting process that says a certain person should become PM upon election, although there is a tradition that says that the leader of the party with the majority in the House of Commons that will be the one that the Queen asks to form a Government.
The U-2 was shot down several times - you are only thinking of the Powers shoot down, while infact there were several shoot downs of Taiwanese U-2s as well.
That clause only relates to the SDK, not the OS.
You can push it as an alternative for development on your Android fork if you want to, which is what Amazon has done.
Not according to the terminology used in the clause I mentioned, as that would be causing or resulting in the fragmentation of Android.
Won't the value of the company drop as a result of any transfer of compensation from the company to someone else? That $74Million would have to come from somewhere if it was cash rather than stock options.
The toss up is whether the person you are compensating was responsible in whole or in part for bringing in more than their compensation package as revenue...
If they come from a company retained pool, that company retained pool would be an asset on the companies balance sheet. So taking it from there lowers the company's value by 76M
From the Oracle financial report, last page:
http://www.oracle.com/us/corporate/investor-relations/financials/q1fy14-detailed-financials-2016793.pdf
However, they are detailed in the Stock Holding Pattern filings, which show as of September 2013 74.98% of the company is held by the company, and 25.02% of the company is held publicly (which is an increase of 0.01 percentage points since June 2013).
http://www.oracle.com/us/industries/financial-services/share-holding-pattern-sep2013-2031438.pdf
You might indeed be able to fork the OS, but you also would have to go your own way with an earlier version of the SDK, or build your own, as clause 3.4 of the Android SDK license says:
3.4 You agree that you will not take any actions that may cause or result in the fragmentation of Android, including but not limited to distributing, participating in the creation of, or promoting in any way a software development kit derived from the SDK.
That depends on how the stock is issued - from a non-issued pool (has 100% of Oracle shares already been issued publicly, or did the company retain a pool) or through a new issue? If the former, no dilution happens.
Great. Are you advocating an intelligence test before your Google Glass is shipped to you? Should Google Glass issue an intelligence test before it allows you to drive with it on?
Or are you saying that only "intelligent" people of the right type would dare drive with Google Glass?
What is your real point?
Two issues with that line of thought -
1. Military pilots (and pilots in general) get a HECK of a lot more training than any person driving on the public road does, including a massive amount of training to handle that helmet mounted display without distraction. When Google Glass comes with a 6 month intensive training course to allow you to drive with it, then you can make that comparison.
2. There's a lot less to run into in the air, even when flying in tight formation.
Neither is "black", but I'd still be classed as racist if I used a persons colour in a negative manner.
Pardon me but the ONLY rule for criticizing Israel while not getting branded an anti-semite is... not criticizing Israel.
Fixed that for you. And I'm serious - this isn't about actual antisemitism, it's about suppression of criticism by claiming racism.
Would that be the same Boeing who took confidential and NDAed Airbus information off of a DoD contract negotiator and then gave her a job after she awarded the contract to Boeing? You know, the scandal that started the whole KC-135 replacement bullshit which has been ongoing for over a decade now. I seem to remember that multiple people ended up in jail over that one...
Airbus including in a presentation slides that are marked "BOEING PROPRIETARY" means nothing - you can stamp all sorts on documents, doesn't mean shit.
Really? Merely connecting to a discover-able service is a violation of the CFAA? Could you care to cite the exact part which backs that up?
If automobile crashes were investigated like aircraft crashes were, then yes you most certainly would get descriptive phrases for what occurs - was that collision with the tree controlled or uncontrolled (Controlled Drive Into Terrain or Uncontrolled Drive Into Terrain)?
There is a reason these terms are used - a phrase like "unscheduled landing" allows airline staff to discuss the issue openly without the potential of raising alarm in those around them, which they may very well have to do in many circumstances, even when there might be relatives standing next to them. You do *not* want to use the term "crashed" when you do not have any more information other than the aircraft is on the ground somewhere.
In the Hudson landing case, there were four airfields in the surrounding area, all within reasonable flight time for the incident if you weren't in the cockpit and thus didn't know the full extent of the issue - the initial incident was a bird strike, so he could have diverted to any one of those airports and it wouldn't have been a crash at all, it would have indeed been an "unscheduled landing" or a "diversion" - you have no idea when all the airline staff get told what happens, so to them its an "unscheduled landing" for as long as it needs to be.
Determining whether the landing was controlled or not puts massive emphasis on what went wrong - did the pilots actually fly the aircraft into the ground? Why? Were they dealing with an issue and not notice the hill infront of them (its happened on several occasions)? Were they unconscious at the time? Why were they unconscious? Why did they not notice?
Why did that car driver drive the car into the lake? Was it a controlled action? Was he drunk? Or was it uncontrolled? Was he asleep? Did the vehicles instrumentation confuse him in some way?
Not so ridiculous when you know why such terminology is in common usage...
Your 14 + 14 would still put Super Mario Bros under copyright in Europe, Australia and the US. So how would it solve this particular issue?
Yeah, great, so there are multiple terms for the same thing.
Its also called a CFIT - Controlled Flight Into Terrain. "Crash" is the most generic phrase you can boil it down to, while the others are more descriptive.
Nice ramble, but tell me the last time POTUS or the Speaker or the Joint Chiefs picked up a weapon in anger rather than sending someone else to fight the actual battle? Someone else who is typically less educated, less well off than themselves?
Your stance sickens me, it truly does.
You can use that argument to support military action against any country that doesn't extradite to your country...
Out of interest, what did he whistleblow? I thought he just decided that access to a particular journel or somethign was too expensive and decided to download and distribute as much as he cold get his hands on?
Having SSL key access means they can capture stuff in transit, which means that either the end user key or the plain text decrypted email must be in transit... So, where is it transiting to and from? Or we're the FBI injecting something onto the page during transit to capture stuff in the users browser?
Does Lavabit do the decryption on the client end, or does the client send their key to the server? What exactly is going on?