Well, I doubt that handling with normal traffic was that much of a constraint. Any aircraft requires distance to decelerate, and the concorde just needs that much more since it goes WAY faster than a conventional airliner.
Sure, you have to be below 200 knots at 2500AGL, but were you going to try to land at 500 knots anyway? By the time you're descending to the kinds of altitudes that have those restrictions you need to be slowing down anyway.
The bigger constraint is only being able to serve airports that are near water, or else you're going to be subsonic for very long distances.
Well, the whole point of the flight was speed, so they probably wanted to accellerate as fast as they could. Taking their time would probably also burn fuel - they had to stay at low altitude until they got up to speed. I think the concorde could climb to high altitude subsonic, but it would have to descend again to accelerate.
Yeah, but they could still track the flights if they check in with ATC. They'd obviously have to at McCarren at the very least. Maybe they go VFR once they're clear of airspace, but I hear they fly airliners out there and it would seem strange to be flying those VFR.
Flying IFR in general is much safer and more hassle-free, especially at jet speeds. You don't have to worry about flying into some temporary security area and getting shot down or something either, and having to dodge clouds or other aircraft. If you fly IFR into a smallish airport for the most part you just punch your route into the autopilot and hit the engage button once you're aloft. About the most you'll have to do is pick which runway to land at, as the route is going to be pretty predictable and air traffic control will try to get it right before you takeoff anyway to make their own jobs easier (keeping airspace clear is much easier when everybody is on a preplanned route designed to separate traffic - basically you just have to tweak things at the destination to keep everybody separated but otherwise everybody is just following the route).
Not a pilot, but one issue is the frequency. Aircraft might be listening to radios, but not on Unicom, if they're controlled by ATC. If you're jumping from high enough it isn't just airport traffic that is going to be an issue.
As far as maps go - skydiving would only show up on a sectional map. I suspect most pilots would look at a sectional around any airport they planned to land at, but if they're just cruising for 500 miles at 5000 feet, I can't imagine that they would necessarily carefully scan the route at that level of detail (which shows every tower and hill in the country).
Then again, I only fly on simulators, and since my life isn't actually on the line and I'm not spending $500 on fuel/etc I don't plan quite that much. Killing an extra tree with charts is a lot cheaper in comparison to actual flying.
Obviously I don't fly around in private jets, but I'd think that they'd largely be flying IFR. A jet moves pretty fast, and I can't imagine they just go buzzing through airspace without any separation at 250kts (or higher), and they're going to burn a LOT of fuel if they stay below 18k feet. They'd probably prefer to not be buzzing around in a pattern either when they land, and having to dodge clouds the whole time, again while flying at 250 kts.
Sure, they can change their destination enroute, but that is a pain for everybody as well, and might involve delay as controllers have to work them into traffic and they won't be coming along an appropriate standard approach/etc unless the change is made very far out.
In small aircraft I tend to agree that there is a lot of room for privacy.
Good concept, but as far as I can tell it doesn't upload in realtime, so the cops can still get the video when they take your phone. The ACLU won't see a thing unless the cop doesn't take your phone in the first place, so you have the opportunity to hit the upload button.
It will have uploaded, but then those services will happily delete the photo when the cop opens the app (likely password-free) and asks the app to delete it. It is the right general idea, but you need some way to ensure the phone can't be used to delete the files, ideally even with the owner's cooperation.
From what I can tell from the reviews/descriptions, this app doesn't upload anywhere in realtime. So, if the police officer takes your phone, you lose the video. It is a bit more discreet, but if the officer sees you pointing your phone at him, he is going to assume you're recording and just stopped before he took the phone.
What is needed is an app that discreetly records, and also uploads the video in realtime to some repository that does not allow you to delete the recording from the phone (or ideally from anywhere if you want real rubber-hose safety). So, they can do whatever they want to the phone and the video is still safe somewhere, ideally in the hands of some organization that will do something with it that is in some other jurisdiction.
I've seen suggestions of dropbox/etc, but unless you somehow set it up to sync instantly and not allow access to delete the files, that isn't going to be good enough.
The problem with trying to reduce unemployment benefits is that we are living in an increasingly specialized society. Suppose I'm a really good WidgetA designer. However, the WidgetB design comes along and makes WidgetA completely obsolete, and nobody wants to hire somebody who is a really great engineer to work on WidgetBs unless they have 5 years of WidgetB experience. That means that I need to demonstrate practical experience with WidgetB on my own dime, likely with some kind of certification. That might take a year, and lots of money.
Or I could just go rob stores or do whatever it is that unproductive people do with their time when you get rid of all other social assistance. Maybe WidgetA skills are transferable to gun design or something, so that I can overwhelm the local private security force that has replaced the police.
Another problem is that with the increase in technology, I think more and more people will simply become completely unemployable. You can sustain a population of hundreds of millions without having half of those people work, so why would you want them to?
The problem is that once you detect an intrusion, what do you do about it?
With your home you can call the police, who will pursue the burglar and potentially catch them. Breaking into a house is a high-risk activity - if somebody spots them the police will be on the way quickly. Break into enough houses and you're likely to get caught - and your haul is just whatever is lying around and easily carried off. If you find a ton of jewelry maybe you'll do OK (though it has limited resale value), but hauling off huge plasma TVs is both difficult and quite detectable (and those have limited value too). If it turns out you have a priceless piano I doubt a burglar would even bother with it.
Contrast that with a computer intrusion. Suppose you can detect it? That will tell you that a bunch of data on a server was transferred off to some remote IP address. Chances are the owner of that IP address has nothing to do with it, and chances are they aren't security conscious - it might even be some grandmother with a virus on her home PC. Likely that connection went around the world three times before it got to your sever, and the intruder could very well be in some country with police who aren't going to be of much help. The attack might even be state-sponsored, though nobody would ever acknowledge that.
The internet is like one big bad neighborhood - you're just a few hops away from anybody on the planet, and even fewer hops away from the first router completely outside of your own government's jurisdiction.
And knowing you've had an intrusion is of little use if the data you're guarding is important. Great, so you know that your plans to buy some company are now on the internet before you have a signed offer - now the value of that company is up 50% and it will cost you a few billion dollars more to buy them.
Sure, they won't be hot while the air is thin, but the air won't stay thin, and they'll be still going rather fast when that happens.
Falling can accellerate you to arbitrarily high speeds - so high that you'd glow in x-rays when you hit atmosphere (though you'd have to fall for billions of years for that). A good proportion of all the matter in the universe is actually in that state.
Sometimes I wonder if the solution to the social security number problem is to just set up an official website that lists every person by name and number. Make the info completely public. Then, watch as any company that uses an ID number as anything other than an ID number collapses.
The issue isn't that people use SSNs to identify individuals. The problem is that they treat the SSN as some kind of shared secret, when it isn't secret at all. Yes, shared secrets are hard, but they don't become less hard by pretending that things that aren't secret really are.
What punishment would that be? The only people likely to be punished are the exit node operators (assuming it is being used to transfer content that is not legal to distribute), unless the person running bittorrent has no idea what they're doing. While most bittorrent clients leak information, they can only leak information they have, and only to hosts they can connect to.
I note that your exit node configuration is based on whitelisting specific ports and is not simply open. That probably is greatly reducing the kinds of run-ins you're going to get with the usual suspects - I doubt many people have their bittorrent clients and such set to run on port 80.
By that line of argument you don't even need Tor, since as long as there are millions of dissidents in China there is nothing the government can do to get rid of all of them.
The problem is that for any individual the concern isn't whether the government will ruin the lives of all the exit node operators, but whether their own life will be ruined.
Maybe true, but I don't exactly hear Apple issuing press releases pointing out that the analyst projections are wrong and people shouldn't be paying so much for their stock as a result. If people actually did what you propose and only listened to Apple's own estimates, then there would be a massive price crash as everybody started valuing the stock based on Apple's much lower projections.
Yeah, but the only reason the stock price dropped was because it was "too high" to begin.
People value a stock based on a certain amount of income. If the market price is below that valuation they buy, and if not they sell. That income is whatever the buyer thinks it will be, not what the company says it will be. So, people thought the profits would be even higher so they bought stock when they shouldn't have, so the price was high, and now that the income has been realized everybody starts selling as it is overpriced.
Stock prices always reflect what people think the company will do, so it tends to only change when there is a surprise.
For whatever reason this stuff gets cast as a problem for the company, but the reality is that the company benefited from a higher share price for a few months.
Oh, they'd be happy to go after the initial seeds as well.
However, some guy who does the uploading for a major Warez group knows what they're doing and they're not going to be seeding a torrent for a week from their home PC in some jurisdiction that the rights holder has easy access into. These guys are fairly hard to catch as a result.
Johnny Teenager who doesn't care if their parents get sued since they've never seen $6k in their entire life and doesn't have any concept of what happens is a different story. They are told by their friend that if they download this program they can install the lastest big-name-game/song on their computer, and it is really easy, and so far their friends haven't gotten in trouble so what could go wrong? They just download files and seed away and are oblivious to the fact that their growing library is being sniffed by 47 different studios/etc, until their parent gets a nice letter demanding payment. Unless the parent goes digging through their PC every week chances are that they won't notice it - if the kid is in their late teens parents aren't going to be monitoring them that closely.
True, but all that happens is that the RIAA lawyers give the studio lawyers a stack of documents with "insert name here" blanks all over the place, and the studios file the suits. Whether they pay for it in their RIAA dues or not isn't really that big of a deal - they still collude to reduce their costs, and as the copyright holders they have standing.
As others have pointed out all this does is drive serious piracy further underground, while bankrupting the occassional parent who has a teenager running Kazaa without their knowledge (as such a parent I can't tell you how paranoid I get about this stuff - and without doing daily computer checks it is almost impossible to stay on top of - all you need is for one of little Johnny's friends to tell him that he's been running FooNet for years without a problem and little Johnny will be happy to install it without bothering to tell the "uninformed" parents).
I've known a few people stuck on near-minimum-wage jobs. It is pretty typical that none will give more than about 35 hours/week or hours. These workers do tend to work multiple jobs as a result, getting none of the overtime benefits.
Oh boy, get rid of net neutrality. What could go wrong? Seems about as good for society as letting a few select news networks decide who can appear in the debates.
I've voted Libertarian on occasion, but sometimes they really miss the boat. Government by and for the megacorp isn't an improvement.
Now, if you want to restrict last-mile providers from providing any kind of content service (including internet access), and instead have them rent space in central offices to anybody who wants to put a rack there and rent line use by the line/byte/etc, and then completely deregulate the content providers, I have no issues at all. The key with natural monopolies is identify just those parts that are problematic and regulate the living daylights out of them, firewall them from everything else, and then let the rest flourish on the free market. We wouldn't have to worry about net neutrality if the big telcos didn't also own half of the cable industry.
Hamburger helper - the wonder meal. ~$2 for the box, about $2 for the hamburger, easily feeds two - drink water.
If you're taking the bus that often you can probably do better than $5/day/person, but the order of magnitude on these calcs is about right. You probably can do better than $850/mo on a poverty-level apartment, but not if you want something closer to a house. Must of rent is about location, and most people below poverty level don't live in nice areas.
I'm not sure that really tells us much, beyond there being a trend towards spending more and more money, and the Dems just happen to be the most recent ones (with growing spending, the party more recently in control will have spent more - just like the whole most-people-who-ever-lived-are-alive-today thing).
Honestly, I'm sick of the whole finger-pointing thing - the problem isn't R's or D's, but incumbents...
Slashdot Mirror
Well, I doubt that handling with normal traffic was that much of a constraint. Any aircraft requires distance to decelerate, and the concorde just needs that much more since it goes WAY faster than a conventional airliner.
Sure, you have to be below 200 knots at 2500AGL, but were you going to try to land at 500 knots anyway? By the time you're descending to the kinds of altitudes that have those restrictions you need to be slowing down anyway.
The bigger constraint is only being able to serve airports that are near water, or else you're going to be subsonic for very long distances.
Well, the whole point of the flight was speed, so they probably wanted to accellerate as fast as they could. Taking their time would probably also burn fuel - they had to stay at low altitude until they got up to speed. I think the concorde could climb to high altitude subsonic, but it would have to descend again to accelerate.
Yeah, but they could still track the flights if they check in with ATC. They'd obviously have to at McCarren at the very least. Maybe they go VFR once they're clear of airspace, but I hear they fly airliners out there and it would seem strange to be flying those VFR.
Flying IFR in general is much safer and more hassle-free, especially at jet speeds. You don't have to worry about flying into some temporary security area and getting shot down or something either, and having to dodge clouds or other aircraft. If you fly IFR into a smallish airport for the most part you just punch your route into the autopilot and hit the engage button once you're aloft. About the most you'll have to do is pick which runway to land at, as the route is going to be pretty predictable and air traffic control will try to get it right before you takeoff anyway to make their own jobs easier (keeping airspace clear is much easier when everybody is on a preplanned route designed to separate traffic - basically you just have to tweak things at the destination to keep everybody separated but otherwise everybody is just following the route).
Not a pilot, but one issue is the frequency. Aircraft might be listening to radios, but not on Unicom, if they're controlled by ATC. If you're jumping from high enough it isn't just airport traffic that is going to be an issue.
As far as maps go - skydiving would only show up on a sectional map. I suspect most pilots would look at a sectional around any airport they planned to land at, but if they're just cruising for 500 miles at 5000 feet, I can't imagine that they would necessarily carefully scan the route at that level of detail (which shows every tower and hill in the country).
Then again, I only fly on simulators, and since my life isn't actually on the line and I'm not spending $500 on fuel/etc I don't plan quite that much. Killing an extra tree with charts is a lot cheaper in comparison to actual flying.
Obviously I don't fly around in private jets, but I'd think that they'd largely be flying IFR. A jet moves pretty fast, and I can't imagine they just go buzzing through airspace without any separation at 250kts (or higher), and they're going to burn a LOT of fuel if they stay below 18k feet. They'd probably prefer to not be buzzing around in a pattern either when they land, and having to dodge clouds the whole time, again while flying at 250 kts.
Sure, they can change their destination enroute, but that is a pain for everybody as well, and might involve delay as controllers have to work them into traffic and they won't be coming along an appropriate standard approach/etc unless the change is made very far out.
In small aircraft I tend to agree that there is a lot of room for privacy.
Good concept, but as far as I can tell it doesn't upload in realtime, so the cops can still get the video when they take your phone. The ACLU won't see a thing unless the cop doesn't take your phone in the first place, so you have the opportunity to hit the upload button.
It will have uploaded, but then those services will happily delete the photo when the cop opens the app (likely password-free) and asks the app to delete it. It is the right general idea, but you need some way to ensure the phone can't be used to delete the files, ideally even with the owner's cooperation.
From what I can tell from the reviews/descriptions, this app doesn't upload anywhere in realtime. So, if the police officer takes your phone, you lose the video. It is a bit more discreet, but if the officer sees you pointing your phone at him, he is going to assume you're recording and just stopped before he took the phone.
What is needed is an app that discreetly records, and also uploads the video in realtime to some repository that does not allow you to delete the recording from the phone (or ideally from anywhere if you want real rubber-hose safety). So, they can do whatever they want to the phone and the video is still safe somewhere, ideally in the hands of some organization that will do something with it that is in some other jurisdiction.
I've seen suggestions of dropbox/etc, but unless you somehow set it up to sync instantly and not allow access to delete the files, that isn't going to be good enough.
The problem with trying to reduce unemployment benefits is that we are living in an increasingly specialized society. Suppose I'm a really good WidgetA designer. However, the WidgetB design comes along and makes WidgetA completely obsolete, and nobody wants to hire somebody who is a really great engineer to work on WidgetBs unless they have 5 years of WidgetB experience. That means that I need to demonstrate practical experience with WidgetB on my own dime, likely with some kind of certification. That might take a year, and lots of money.
Or I could just go rob stores or do whatever it is that unproductive people do with their time when you get rid of all other social assistance. Maybe WidgetA skills are transferable to gun design or something, so that I can overwhelm the local private security force that has replaced the police.
Another problem is that with the increase in technology, I think more and more people will simply become completely unemployable. You can sustain a population of hundreds of millions without having half of those people work, so why would you want them to?
The problem is that once you detect an intrusion, what do you do about it?
With your home you can call the police, who will pursue the burglar and potentially catch them. Breaking into a house is a high-risk activity - if somebody spots them the police will be on the way quickly. Break into enough houses and you're likely to get caught - and your haul is just whatever is lying around and easily carried off. If you find a ton of jewelry maybe you'll do OK (though it has limited resale value), but hauling off huge plasma TVs is both difficult and quite detectable (and those have limited value too). If it turns out you have a priceless piano I doubt a burglar would even bother with it.
Contrast that with a computer intrusion. Suppose you can detect it? That will tell you that a bunch of data on a server was transferred off to some remote IP address. Chances are the owner of that IP address has nothing to do with it, and chances are they aren't security conscious - it might even be some grandmother with a virus on her home PC. Likely that connection went around the world three times before it got to your sever, and the intruder could very well be in some country with police who aren't going to be of much help. The attack might even be state-sponsored, though nobody would ever acknowledge that.
The internet is like one big bad neighborhood - you're just a few hops away from anybody on the planet, and even fewer hops away from the first router completely outside of your own government's jurisdiction.
And knowing you've had an intrusion is of little use if the data you're guarding is important. Great, so you know that your plans to buy some company are now on the internet before you have a signed offer - now the value of that company is up 50% and it will cost you a few billion dollars more to buy them.
Sure, they won't be hot while the air is thin, but the air won't stay thin, and they'll be still going rather fast when that happens.
Falling can accellerate you to arbitrarily high speeds - so high that you'd glow in x-rays when you hit atmosphere (though you'd have to fall for billions of years for that). A good proportion of all the matter in the universe is actually in that state.
Sometimes I wonder if the solution to the social security number problem is to just set up an official website that lists every person by name and number. Make the info completely public. Then, watch as any company that uses an ID number as anything other than an ID number collapses.
The issue isn't that people use SSNs to identify individuals. The problem is that they treat the SSN as some kind of shared secret, when it isn't secret at all. Yes, shared secrets are hard, but they don't become less hard by pretending that things that aren't secret really are.
What punishment would that be? The only people likely to be punished are the exit node operators (assuming it is being used to transfer content that is not legal to distribute), unless the person running bittorrent has no idea what they're doing. While most bittorrent clients leak information, they can only leak information they have, and only to hosts they can connect to.
I note that your exit node configuration is based on whitelisting specific ports and is not simply open. That probably is greatly reducing the kinds of run-ins you're going to get with the usual suspects - I doubt many people have their bittorrent clients and such set to run on port 80.
By that line of argument you don't even need Tor, since as long as there are millions of dissidents in China there is nothing the government can do to get rid of all of them.
The problem is that for any individual the concern isn't whether the government will ruin the lives of all the exit node operators, but whether their own life will be ruined.
Maybe true, but I don't exactly hear Apple issuing press releases pointing out that the analyst projections are wrong and people shouldn't be paying so much for their stock as a result. If people actually did what you propose and only listened to Apple's own estimates, then there would be a massive price crash as everybody started valuing the stock based on Apple's much lower projections.
True, but if people believed the Apple estimates the stock price would never have been so high to begin with.
Yeah, but the only reason the stock price dropped was because it was "too high" to begin.
People value a stock based on a certain amount of income. If the market price is below that valuation they buy, and if not they sell. That income is whatever the buyer thinks it will be, not what the company says it will be. So, people thought the profits would be even higher so they bought stock when they shouldn't have, so the price was high, and now that the income has been realized everybody starts selling as it is overpriced.
Stock prices always reflect what people think the company will do, so it tends to only change when there is a surprise.
For whatever reason this stuff gets cast as a problem for the company, but the reality is that the company benefited from a higher share price for a few months.
Oh, they'd be happy to go after the initial seeds as well.
However, some guy who does the uploading for a major Warez group knows what they're doing and they're not going to be seeding a torrent for a week from their home PC in some jurisdiction that the rights holder has easy access into. These guys are fairly hard to catch as a result.
Johnny Teenager who doesn't care if their parents get sued since they've never seen $6k in their entire life and doesn't have any concept of what happens is a different story. They are told by their friend that if they download this program they can install the lastest big-name-game/song on their computer, and it is really easy, and so far their friends haven't gotten in trouble so what could go wrong? They just download files and seed away and are oblivious to the fact that their growing library is being sniffed by 47 different studios/etc, until their parent gets a nice letter demanding payment. Unless the parent goes digging through their PC every week chances are that they won't notice it - if the kid is in their late teens parents aren't going to be monitoring them that closely.
True, but all that happens is that the RIAA lawyers give the studio lawyers a stack of documents with "insert name here" blanks all over the place, and the studios file the suits. Whether they pay for it in their RIAA dues or not isn't really that big of a deal - they still collude to reduce their costs, and as the copyright holders they have standing.
As others have pointed out all this does is drive serious piracy further underground, while bankrupting the occassional parent who has a teenager running Kazaa without their knowledge (as such a parent I can't tell you how paranoid I get about this stuff - and without doing daily computer checks it is almost impossible to stay on top of - all you need is for one of little Johnny's friends to tell him that he's been running FooNet for years without a problem and little Johnny will be happy to install it without bothering to tell the "uninformed" parents).
I've known a few people stuck on near-minimum-wage jobs. It is pretty typical that none will give more than about 35 hours/week or hours. These workers do tend to work multiple jobs as a result, getting none of the overtime benefits.
Oh boy, get rid of net neutrality. What could go wrong? Seems about as good for society as letting a few select news networks decide who can appear in the debates.
I've voted Libertarian on occasion, but sometimes they really miss the boat. Government by and for the megacorp isn't an improvement.
Now, if you want to restrict last-mile providers from providing any kind of content service (including internet access), and instead have them rent space in central offices to anybody who wants to put a rack there and rent line use by the line/byte/etc, and then completely deregulate the content providers, I have no issues at all. The key with natural monopolies is identify just those parts that are problematic and regulate the living daylights out of them, firewall them from everything else, and then let the rest flourish on the free market. We wouldn't have to worry about net neutrality if the big telcos didn't also own half of the cable industry.
Hamburger helper - the wonder meal. ~$2 for the box, about $2 for the hamburger, easily feeds two - drink water.
If you're taking the bus that often you can probably do better than $5/day/person, but the order of magnitude on these calcs is about right. You probably can do better than $850/mo on a poverty-level apartment, but not if you want something closer to a house. Must of rent is about location, and most people below poverty level don't live in nice areas.
I'm not sure that really tells us much, beyond there being a trend towards spending more and more money, and the Dems just happen to be the most recent ones (with growing spending, the party more recently in control will have spent more - just like the whole most-people-who-ever-lived-are-alive-today thing).
Honestly, I'm sick of the whole finger-pointing thing - the problem isn't R's or D's, but incumbents...