Edremy, I was refering to the shoulder fired version which was supposed to be a hypervelocity round not the tank fired round, but thanks for the info on the tank fired round.
APFSDS would be "Armour Piercing Fin Stabilized Discarding Sabot", but that is a tank munition and I know for a fact that you don't want to shoulder fire a tank round.:)
This was supposed to be javelen sized and used a delpleted uranium core. I believe the payload was ultimately pencil sized. lets say it was 5mm in diameter and 10cm shaft of uranium moving at Mach 7 well, doing some google math gives me
(((((.25^2) * pi * 10 *.0190508) / 2) * (2320.5^2)) / 4.18400) * 9.0779184e-07 = 0.0218509768kg of dynamite
in laymans terms. which certainly doesn;t sound like much until you realize that that force is exerted on an area of.196cm^2 and it is 100,710.849 joules applied in 1/23205 of a second or 2.33699525 × 10^09 watts yes that 2.33 gigawatts applied to.196cm^2 Now thats a lot of juice
And I had an uncle named B.S. no first name or middle name mind you just the letters B and S. Want to talk about someone who would not get along well with this ruling?
And the reason for this is because the mass is traveling faster than the wavefront of the explosion would. Seriously an explosive would only disrupt the kinetics. There was a call for shoulder fired hyper-velocity missiles a few years back, I have no idea what happened with them.
So long as they are not my clients, I would prefer people leave large gaping holes in thier security. Of course when they don't, I get paid more, but it is a balance of things.
Some times you feel like cracking a nut, some times you don't (to paraphrase the confectionary slogan from times since past)
Glass can be coated with a "transparent" (ok not really transparent but it looks like window tinting) conductive material that will block various ranges of em radiation. We have used it in the past with gauss cages to build em isolation rooms for conferences
Re:Look at Apple's Xserve RAID
on
SATA vs ATA?
·
· Score: 1
Can you back this statement up
"Apple uses only the best drives from each lot"
Because I would love to know what your source is for this. I have been working with Apple and on Macs for decades now (checks... yes, I can go plural!) and have never heard anything like this before.
Why the smeg are you going off on me? I am not complaining about the lack of product, if I wanted a G5 Xserve I could go pick one up. The units just are not shipping at the levels one would expect. I was commenting on the fact that the grandparent to my post said none were shipping and the parent replied they had one. I was merely then suggesting that the GP should have said they were not shipping at reasonable levels. Is wrong to complain about shipping levels for production equipment? You seem to think so, but I certainly don't.
Steve Jobs has made me more money that anyone other than Bill Gates and crew, and while I own PCs (like the Via Eden embedded systems) they serve no working purpose for me. I was born on a PDP 11, but I will die on a Mac. That doesn't mean that if I choose to be I wont be critical of a company however, but in this case I wasn't.
Apple isn't stupid, they have a reasonable idea of the demand for something like the G5 Xserve. The issue is not the processors but some other factor, I don't know what, but then I haven't asked anyone I know out at 1 Infinite Loop about it either.
I am no fan of intel and as a matter of fact I have only ever purchased 1 intel X86 proc for a PC ever and it was when the 386/16 was hot stuff. So take a step down off of your AC Soapbox and read the posts before you go off and blather incessantly next time.
1) when whomever the dominant EU (end user %User_joke) OS ( %Lame_MS_comment) ships driver that default to something higher than 1024x768
2) when the bell curve 60% norm can can display said higher resolution at 72DPI (not everone can read text 6 pt text at 96dpi mangled by 1600x1200 displays {what i run my display at (NEC/Mitsu Diamond 19") and to me it looks quite nice but everyone who comes by complains that they cant read the screen}
3) thing (yeah I know I said 2) when the most common browser can actually start rendering CSS anywhere close to correctly and/or ignore what it doesnt do correctly instead of breaking things.
LOL! I use my firewire too don't worry but the max bus speed on my version of 1394 is 400mbits-1 plus firewire converters cost money I have pc cases and power supplies just laying around from upgrades I do.
And in such cases the bill or statute should have followed the Ramseyer/ Cordon Rules when explicitly affecting other statutes ( as is well stated in the OPINION you quote since it is an OC and not a law itself.) in the cases of implicit alteration it is the opinion of this OPINION that later law supercedes original, however from a constitutional law position this is quite obviously incorrect. This is of course one of the issues we are facing with the difference between actuvist and conservative judiciary members. So I will grant you that there are a number of experts who will tout and write OPINIONS and give us their opinions, for both sides of the argument.
Note to other readers I have capitalized the word opinion in places where is is a legal opinion and not a personal opinion the differences are signifigant but outside the realm of/. discussion those of you with a legal bg of any kind already know the difference.
I have 7 drive spaces (plus the DVD burner) in my Quicksilver 2002 but I have routinely run my systems with external drives. A dremel tool and 10 minutes of work make a nice slot on an expansion slot cover (what do you call those little metal strips anyway?) and I feed the ribbon through and into another case. No problems with having enough power (seperate power and ventilation) oe heat build up. Why force the drive to be internal? I would rather have a lower system temp than internal drives.
Note this does not assauge the geek factor of mounting 2 different hacks in a box where one should be and I admire the thought, I just think external via SCSI, Fibre, or Firewire is a better solution and it needn't cost any more.
You did waste your money on con law if that is your opinion. My con law profs at SMU certainly taught me differntly, as has my experince working in private investigations, security and dealing with lawyers way to much.. see my linked web page for more background.
Where A and B are two sets, and C is the overlap between the two, the ealier set (lets say its A) is the superior set for the purposes of C. It does not make set B go away, unless set B is whorely a subset of A.
You do not repeal old laws by passing new ones (with the exception of specifically repealing a law) You might want to go find a constitutional lawyer or a judge that actually deals with case law, precidents and the like and have them explain it to you.
Dunno, since I am a mac user and don't play games I have never used their software If I had a couple of million to blow on lawyers though I would happily challenge it in court. Anyone wanna donate? (am only half joking)
Neither is a force. the classic example of swinging a water bucket on a cord is what it used to describe either. Unfortunately Slashdot doesn't allow decent ways of making even halfway accurate diagrams so I will attempt to describe it.
1) You can have A centripetal force which would be defined as a force which is applied to a mass in order for the mass to maintain circular motion. This is due to the issue that in the absence of external forces an object will maintain its current energy level eg "An object in motion tends to stay in motion" and further maintains its vectors permanently (in the absence of external forces mind you)
To cause a circular motion a force must be applied perpendicular to the velocity of the object. In the case of the illustration of the water and the cord it is the tension in the cord that provides this energy. The stronger the force, the greater acceleration in that direction and therefore the tighter the curve.
So as you can see in the case of a vehicle moving around a corner the tyres are providing a force which can be described as centripetal but it A centripetal force not centripetal force. I don't want to sound like a grammar nazi but there is a significant difference between the two statements.
2) "Centrifugal" Force is also not a force but is also the apparent "force" that is effected on an object, this time not to cause it to move in a circle but rather apparently because it is moving in a circle (or curve in general as all of these would be).
You should be able to now see that neither is a force in its own right, though it is easy to see how people would think that they were at first glace. Personally I dind't understand the concepts myself until I was re-exposed to them years ago while taking my "A-Levels" (though I am certain if I had taken GCSE or "O-Level" physics it would have been explained (rather than my poor american science education until age 12).
Rather than continue rambling i will summarize it as thus: Neither "centripetal" nor "centrifugal" "forces" are forces. the first is often used to describe the perpendicular force applied to cause circular motion the latter used to describe the effects of motion of an object around a curve. So in closing they are both i fact fictitious but I can see why you might think otherwise.
Also, is there a mainstream web browser for GNU/Linux that doesn't have popup blocking in its current release (if it was ever vulnerable to popups) ? Because on the shootout page they mention a popup blocker, unless they expect me to run IE on Gnu/Linux lol.
B) A car careens around a curve and drives into your living room
<languagepolice> Actually, the sentripetal force prevents careening from happening when going around a curve. What often happens, though, is that a car careers off the curve. </languagepolice>
You might want to talk to the person who wrote the article I was quoting rather than me. I would think they are more likely to be able to change the original content. - Just a suggestion
Further, if you are going to comment on the grammatics of my post (or really of my quote) you might want to at least try and spell centripetal correctly.
In addition to that, when posting here in geekland you might also want to be aware of the issue that there really is no such beast as centripetal force, as it is in fact simply intertia and not a force by any means.
Of course these are simply suggestions for the so aptly named:
Slashdot Mirror
Edremy,
I was refering to the shoulder fired version which was supposed to be a hypervelocity round not the tank fired round, but thanks for the info on the tank fired round.
This was supposed to be javelen sized and used a delpleted uranium core. I believe the payload was ultimately pencil sized. lets say it was 5mm in diameter and 10cm shaft of uranium moving at Mach 7 well, doing some google math gives me in laymans terms. which certainly doesn;t sound like much until you realize that that force is exerted on an area of
And I had an uncle named B.S. no first name or middle name mind you just the letters B and S. Want to talk about someone who would not get along well with this ruling?
And the reason for this is because the mass is traveling faster than the wavefront of the explosion would. Seriously an explosive would only disrupt the kinetics. There was a call for shoulder fired hyper-velocity missiles a few years back, I have no idea what happened with them.
Agreed but look for pricing on froogle/pricewatch/pricegrabber etc first.
So long as they are not my clients, I would prefer people leave large gaping holes in thier security. Of course when they don't, I get paid more, but it is a balance of things.
Some times you feel like cracking a nut, some times you don't (to paraphrase the confectionary slogan from times since past)
Glass can be coated with a "transparent" (ok not really transparent but it looks like window tinting) conductive material that will block various ranges of em radiation. We have used it in the past with gauss cages to build em isolation rooms for conferences
Where is the 1:1 scale model of Vger?
Why the smeg are you going off on me? I am not complaining about the lack of product, if I wanted a G5 Xserve I could go pick one up. The units just are not shipping at the levels one would expect. I was commenting on the fact that the grandparent to my post said none were shipping and the parent replied they had one. I was merely then suggesting that the GP should have said they were not shipping at reasonable levels. Is wrong to complain about shipping levels for production equipment? You seem to think so, but I certainly don't.
Steve Jobs has made me more money that anyone other than Bill Gates and crew, and while I own PCs (like the Via Eden embedded systems) they serve no working purpose for me. I was born on a PDP 11, but I will die on a Mac. That doesn't mean that if I choose to be I wont be critical of a company however, but in this case I wasn't.
Apple isn't stupid, they have a reasonable idea of the demand for something like the G5 Xserve. The issue is not the processors but some other factor, I don't know what, but then I haven't asked anyone I know out at 1 Infinite Loop about it either.
I am no fan of intel and as a matter of fact I have only ever purchased 1 intel X86 proc for a PC ever and it was when the 386/16 was hot stuff. So take a step down off of your AC Soapbox and read the posts before you go off and blather incessantly next time.
2 things happen:
1) when whomever the dominant EU (end user %User_joke) OS ( %Lame_MS_comment) ships driver that default to something higher than 1024x768
2) when the bell curve 60% norm can can display said higher resolution at 72DPI (not everone can read text 6 pt text at 96dpi mangled by 1600x1200 displays {what i run my display at (NEC/Mitsu Diamond 19") and to me it looks quite nice but everyone who comes by complains that they cant read the screen}
3) thing (yeah I know I said 2) when the most common browser can actually start rendering CSS anywhere close to correctly and/or ignore what it doesnt do correctly instead of breaking things.
If you want to discus this further just email me and we can banter back and forth all day long. My listed email is legit.
LOL! I use my firewire too don't worry but the max bus speed on my version of 1394 is 400mbits-1 plus firewire converters cost money I have pc cases and power supplies just laying around from upgrades I do.
OK, maybe he should have said shipping in any reasonable numbers :)
And in such cases the bill or statute should have followed the Ramseyer/ Cordon Rules when explicitly affecting other statutes ( as is well stated in the OPINION you quote since it is an OC and not a law itself.) in the cases of implicit alteration it is the opinion of this OPINION that later law supercedes original, however from a constitutional law position this is quite obviously incorrect. This is of course one of the issues we are facing with the difference between actuvist and conservative judiciary members. So I will grant you that there are a number of experts who will tout and write OPINIONS and give us their opinions, for both sides of the argument.
/. discussion those of you with a legal bg of any kind already know the difference.
Note to other readers I have capitalized the word opinion in places where is is a legal opinion and not a personal opinion the differences are signifigant but outside the realm of
I have 7 drive spaces (plus the DVD burner) in my Quicksilver 2002 but I have routinely run my systems with external drives. A dremel tool and 10 minutes of work make a nice slot on an expansion slot cover (what do you call those little metal strips anyway?) and I feed the ribbon through and into another case. No problems with having enough power (seperate power and ventilation) oe heat build up. Why force the drive to be internal? I would rather have a lower system temp than internal drives.
Note this does not assauge the geek factor of mounting 2 different hacks in a box where one should be and I admire the thought, I just think external via SCSI, Fibre, or Firewire is a better solution and it needn't cost any more.
You did waste your money on con law if that is your opinion. My con law profs at SMU certainly taught me differntly, as has my experince working in private investigations, security and dealing with lawyers way to much .. see my linked web page for more background.
Where A and B are two sets, and C is the overlap between the two, the ealier set (lets say its A) is the superior set for the purposes of C. It does not make set B go away, unless set B is whorely a subset of A.
Just a different way of saying it all.
You do not repeal old laws by passing new ones (with the exception of specifically repealing a law) You might want to go find a constitutional lawyer or a judge that actually deals with case law, precidents and the like and have them explain it to you.
Dunno, since I am a mac user and don't play games I have never used their software If I had a couple of million to blow on lawyers though I would happily challenge it in court. Anyone wanna donate? (am only half joking)
In cases where laws overlap, legal precidence simply states that the previous law trumps the later one.
Neither is a force. the classic example of swinging a water bucket on a cord is what it used to describe either. Unfortunately Slashdot doesn't allow decent ways of making even halfway accurate diagrams so I will attempt to describe it.
1) You can have A centripetal force which would be defined as a force which is applied to a mass in order for the mass to maintain circular motion. This is due to the issue that in the absence of external forces an object will maintain its current energy level eg "An object in motion tends to stay in motion" and further maintains its vectors permanently (in the absence of external forces mind you)
To cause a circular motion a force must be applied perpendicular to the velocity of the object. In the case of the illustration of the water and the cord it is the tension in the cord that provides this energy. The stronger the force, the greater acceleration in that direction and therefore the tighter the curve.
So as you can see in the case of a vehicle moving around a corner the tyres are providing a force which can be described as centripetal but it A centripetal force not centripetal force. I don't want to sound like a grammar nazi but there is a significant difference between the two statements.
2) "Centrifugal" Force is also not a force but is also the apparent "force" that is effected on an object, this time not to cause it to move in a circle but rather apparently because it is moving in a circle (or curve in general as all of these would be).
You should be able to now see that neither is a force in its own right, though it is easy to see how people would think that they were at first glace. Personally I dind't understand the concepts myself until I was re-exposed to them years ago while taking my "A-Levels" (though I am certain if I had taken GCSE or "O-Level" physics it would have been explained (rather than my poor american science education until age 12).
Rather than continue rambling i will summarize it as thus:
Neither "centripetal" nor "centrifugal" "forces" are forces. the first is often used to describe the perpendicular force applied to cause circular motion the latter used to describe the effects of motion of an object around a curve. So in closing they are both i fact fictitious but I can see why you might think otherwise.
Also, is there a mainstream web browser for GNU/Linux that doesn't have popup blocking in its current release (if it was ever vulnerable to popups) ? Because on the shootout page they mention a popup blocker, unless they expect me to run IE on Gnu/Linux lol.
Further, if you are going to comment on the grammatics of my post (or really of my quote) you might want to at least try and spell centripetal correctly.
In addition to that, when posting here in geekland you might also want to be aware of the issue that there really is no such beast as centripetal force, as it is in fact simply intertia and not a force by any means.
Of course these are simply suggestions for the so aptly named:
Cheers, though emailing me woiuld have saved many many more bytes :)