This effect is known as cavitation - it occurs because of a drop in pressure causing sea water to boil at sea temperature in the low pressure parts of the sound wave. It also occurs in front of ship's propellers, and is one way for submarines to detect surface vessels ("popping" sounds). Our frigate's propellers started cavitating at about 12 knots' speed.
Submarines have propellers especially designed to avoid this, as their operation is based on stealth.
The sound pressure from an active sonar dome can exceed 200 db due to the high density of water, and can kill divers in the vicinity of the vessel. A fellow operator inadvertently turned on the sonar while in harbour, killed some fish (luckily no divers were in the water at the time), and was relocated instantly.
Seems like a better player, depending on the "ugradeability" of the codecs. It says on the page that they will add support for SMB over ethernet, doesn't say whether you can also access files on other shares from the player.
My Plextor 241040A can be configured through Plextools to only read the first session of a CD. I tried it with a 48x Plextor too, works beautifully with certain protected CDs. Just enable that option and rip with your favourite extraction program.
Don't know if anything like that is possible under Linux (BSD?) though (I boot into w2k for audio extraction).
I use one at work (graphics editing), for which it is absolutely spectacular. Comfortable, and good precision.
I borrowed it home to check out it's gaming capabilities, and found it lacking. It seems that it lags and skips just a tad when you turn quickly (because of rf transmission?), and the batteries makes it a little heavy.
Exactly. Most if not all subs are electric, conventional ones charge their batteries with combustion engines while surfaced or in "snorkel mode". BTW, active sonar is "imaging" based on the echo of an emitted sound, while passive sonar is just a really efficient microphone.
The frigate I was stationed on used steam turbine propulsion (steam generated by a diesel burner, from a boiler just as on OLD train engines) to avoid explosion noise from the engine. But passive sonar is generally useless on a frigate, because it will ALWAYS be far better on board the submarine. Subs almost never use active sonar, not even for rangefinding. It would give their position dead away. Anti sub warfare from the surface relies heavily on active sonar though, and that is where minisubs such as these enter the picture (sabotation). There are military versions far better suited for this, though.
7000 % 36 * $13 = $2527 IN FILM MONEY SAVED IN SIX MONTHS
While that might be the case for you, in my case it would be "RIAA math", ie I would take fewer pictures by far if I used film, thus it's not real money saved. With digital, each picture is virtually free, enabling me to take a lot more. That is the 'net gain' for me going digital. As you state, you also take 150% more pictures now as opposed to with analog.
That, in turn, enables me to experiment with vastly more settings and compositions, and improves my photography skills a lot more than if I were using film. Even with a relatively cheap digital camera the effect is that I take much better pictures now.
Radar, of course, doesn't work underwater, as you probably know. Sonar does, but it's really difficult to pick up a craft this small on active sonar (Not enough "surface" to give a good echo). You *could* maybe detect it passively, but I suspect this sub is very quiet, being electrical and all.
Yeah shameless pug, but:
these people (friends of mine) are happy with an online distribution model... MS-based, but they're happy with it. I'm too, on their behalf, though I'm nowhere near happy with MS in general. I just believe that you should choose the right tool. In this case, it's the closest/only tool
Actually, when I take a closer look at the exchange rates (I'm Norwegian), it's more like $870,000. And yeah, about that I'm pretty sure, as I know the surgeon well. It was a big investment for him.
That specialized Laser equipment can be expensive, you know:)
I've gotten Laser eye corrective surgery (LASIK). A friend of mine accompanied me to the surgery, he didn't tell me until after the operation that the $1 000 000 surgical Laser had a controller screen running Win98.
Some complain about using Win98? Well, *I* have had it fire Laser beams at my eyes:)
I've had a look at the source, and although I'm far from an expert C++ coder, it doesn't seem to me that the Steam code is included. There is, however, a 'steam.lib' file in there.
If I understand the workings of Steam correctly, it handles authentication, and also includes mechanisms for controlling the integrity of game files. Ie there's no way you could use a hacked version of the engine for your cheats, and still authenticate through Steam.
<tinfoilhat reinforced with lead>
Maybe they intentionally leaked a (mangled?) version of the source just to prove that Steam has its virtues when it comes to dealing with hacked executables?
</tinfoilhat etc>
Re:A method that increases the return on spam may.
on
Building Better Spam
·
· Score: 1
The point is to increase the response rate... so why would a spammer lower the volume if his response rate goes up? Sending spam is cheap.
I posted upwards basically agreeing with you. But, imagine this: Spammers sending 10^6 emails are ten times more likely to get trouble (legal or otherwise) than spammers sending 10^5 emails...
Then targetting would become a lot more attractive to spammers too, which in turns means less spam to everyone.
I'm generally against global regulations, but this is a case where I would like it to be more difficult to just move your operations to a different country (rent server space somewhere in Asia, or just locate an open relay...)
Re:at the limit it actually would be a good thing.
on
Building Better Spam
·
· Score: 1
protect the weak (and kill spammers dead)
I'm against death sentences, can't we just kill them until they're only just breathing?:)
Re:Higher response rate is good for everyone
on
Building Better Spam
·
· Score: 1
Let's face it, spam with higher resposne rate is better than spam with little to no response rate.
Why? Well, granted, it's better for the spammers. But considering the cost of sending emails, there's no reason for them to LOWER their volume, only to improve their "spam-crafting". That way they can increase the response rate from, say, 0.1% to 0.5%. Still, more than 99% will receive emails they're not interested in, and never will be. Improvement for the spammers, "same shit/new wrapping" to you... and to the vast majority.
There's no financial or other reason for spammers to finely target their audience.
Slashdot Mirror
I used to be a sonar operator.
This effect is known as cavitation - it occurs because of a drop in pressure causing sea water to boil at sea temperature in the low pressure parts of the sound wave. It also occurs in front of ship's propellers, and is one way for submarines to detect surface vessels ("popping" sounds). Our frigate's propellers started cavitating at about 12 knots' speed.
Submarines have propellers especially designed to avoid this, as their operation is based on stealth.
The sound pressure from an active sonar dome can exceed 200 db due to the high density of water, and can kill divers in the vicinity of the vessel. A fellow operator inadvertently turned on the sonar while in harbour, killed some fish (luckily no divers were in the water at the time), and was relocated instantly.
Makes sense to me...
Hmmm, has someone been reading Sluggy Freelance?
Great free online cartoon, BTW
Well, forgot to include the details given: I suppose you would have to know what the impurities consist of as well to identify its origins.
Wow, according to the lab report of 'Pierpont': 9.5 grammes of 95% pure gold. Market value about $100.
Impressive. The (original:) scammer seems to have SOME disposable resources...
Is anyone here a chemist who can look up the chemical properties given? Is it Ghanaian?
Here you go
Seems like a better player, depending on the "ugradeability" of the codecs. It says on the page that they will add support for SMB over ethernet, doesn't say whether you can also access files on other shares from the player.
My Plextor 241040A can be configured through Plextools to only read the first session of a CD. I tried it with a 48x Plextor too, works beautifully with certain protected CDs. Just enable that option and rip with your favourite extraction program.
Don't know if anything like that is possible under Linux (BSD?) though (I boot into w2k for audio extraction).
I use one at work (graphics editing), for which it is absolutely spectacular. Comfortable, and good precision.
I borrowed it home to check out it's gaming capabilities, and found it lacking. It seems that it lags and skips just a tad when you turn quickly (because of rf transmission?), and the batteries makes it a little heavy.
For gaming, I prefer the MX300.
You lucky bastard, you had floppies.
SYS 52598
LOADING
*Long wait*
READY.
*Switch tapes*
SYS 52592
*Long wait*
Or at whichever address the commands of your turbo tape where located
I won't forget those numbers ever.
I wish I were kidding...
Wow, thanks man!
Exactly. Most if not all subs are electric, conventional ones charge their batteries with combustion engines while surfaced or in "snorkel mode". BTW, active sonar is "imaging" based on the echo of an emitted sound, while passive sonar is just a really efficient microphone.
The frigate I was stationed on used steam turbine propulsion (steam generated by a diesel burner, from a boiler just as on OLD train engines) to avoid explosion noise from the engine. But passive sonar is generally useless on a frigate, because it will ALWAYS be far better on board the submarine. Subs almost never use active sonar, not even for rangefinding. It would give their position dead away. Anti sub warfare from the surface relies heavily on active sonar though, and that is where minisubs such as these enter the picture (sabotation). There are military versions far better suited for this, though.
While that might be the case for you, in my case it would be "RIAA math", ie I would take fewer pictures by far if I used film, thus it's not real money saved. With digital, each picture is virtually free, enabling me to take a lot more. That is the 'net gain' for me going digital. As you state, you also take 150% more pictures now as opposed to with analog.
That, in turn, enables me to experiment with vastly more settings and compositions, and improves my photography skills a lot more than if I were using film. Even with a relatively cheap digital camera the effect is that I take much better pictures now.
I'm saving up for a digital SLR, by the way
I was a sonar operator in the navy.
Radar, of course, doesn't work underwater, as you probably know. Sonar does, but it's really difficult to pick up a craft this small on active sonar (Not enough "surface" to give a good echo). You *could* maybe detect it passively, but I suspect this sub is very quiet, being electrical and all.
Yeah shameless pug, but: these people (friends of mine) are happy with an online distribution model... MS-based, but they're happy with it. I'm too, on their behalf, though I'm nowhere near happy with MS in general. I just believe that you should choose the right tool. In this case, it's the closest/only tool
Actually, when I take a closer look at the exchange rates (I'm Norwegian), it's more like $870,000. And yeah, about that I'm pretty sure, as I know the surgeon well. It was a big investment for him.
That specialized Laser equipment can be expensive, you know
I've gotten Laser eye corrective surgery (LASIK). A friend of mine accompanied me to the surgery, he didn't tell me until after the operation that the $1 000 000 surgical Laser had a controller screen running Win98.
Some complain about using Win98? Well, *I* have had it fire Laser beams at my eyes
They could've meant 66 kilobits?
You're quite right.
Camino == (small) road and Real == Royal.
Sorry, have pulled an all-nighter.
On a Yahoo Search for 'map', their own map service shows up third. MapBlast and MapQuest comes first.
Good there are still honest people...
except for a planet of course, which will appear absolutely vastly humongous to you
I've had a look at the source, and although I'm far from an expert C++ coder, it doesn't seem to me that the Steam code is included. There is, however, a 'steam.lib' file in there.
If I understand the workings of Steam correctly, it handles authentication, and also includes mechanisms for controlling the integrity of game files. Ie there's no way you could use a hacked version of the engine for your cheats, and still authenticate through Steam.
<tinfoilhat reinforced with lead>
Maybe they intentionally leaked a (mangled?) version of the source just to prove that Steam has its virtues when it comes to dealing with hacked executables?
</tinfoilhat etc>
The point is to increase the response rate... so why would a spammer lower the volume if his response rate goes up? Sending spam is cheap.
I posted upwards basically agreeing with you. But, imagine this: Spammers sending 10^6 emails are ten times more likely to get trouble (legal or otherwise) than spammers sending 10^5 emails...
Then targetting would become a lot more attractive to spammers too, which in turns means less spam to everyone.
I'm generally against global regulations, but this is a case where I would like it to be more difficult to just move your operations to a different country (rent server space somewhere in Asia, or just locate an open relay...)
I'm against death sentences, can't we just kill them until they're only just breathing?
Why? Well, granted, it's better for the spammers. But considering the cost of sending emails, there's no reason for them to LOWER their volume, only to improve their "spam-crafting". That way they can increase the response rate from, say, 0.1% to 0.5%. Still, more than 99% will receive emails they're not interested in, and never will be. Improvement for the spammers, "same shit/new wrapping" to you... and to the vast majority.
There's no financial or other reason for spammers to finely target their audience.