As in Computer Numeric Control. I'm familiar with machine tools, the tools that shape metals and other solid materials thru material removal, but don't tell a pilot that a computer doesn't help with any physical work.
Of course, you still have to tell it where to go.
The force multiplier for the brain? Civilization. Other human minds. And their products (libraries, universities, etc.).
There's a really big hole in the ground about ten blocks south from where I'm writing this that serves as a warning against your type of over-confidence.
From a Nuke? From an ICBM? Holy shit, where do you live?
Your argument would also keep the Iranians out of commercial aviation.
Yes, and keeping them dumb or engaging in armed conflict is going to change Sharia law. We should get right on it, undermine their society with armed confrontation. That should work out nicely.
Now that is what I call flamebait. Yes, the web "rescued" some un-aired super bowl ads like I "rescued" some girl's virginity. (hypothetically speaking of course)
Hint: If your warhead reaches escape velocity, you've bombed someone not on earth.
Why is everyone so worried that Iran will deliver a nuke via ICBM? Really? What if they could deliver ten nukes? At which point should I be worried about another country joining the nuclear club? When they can enrich uranium? When they have a bomb? When they develop rocket technology to a degree with which they can target other countries? When they have several hundred warheads on as many rockets? Really, when should I be concerned, because it seems that ship left port decades ago. Like when then US and the Soviets did it. Now, when can we discard our childish things and become men?
Yes, it is very dangerous business, having nude photos of underage persons floating around on the internet. Society will crumble! Thank god they've arrested the perpetrators and will now prevent the victims from being scarred for life because a nude photo of them was seen by everyone. Now the victims will be scarred for life for being labeled a sex offender. Justice is served.
But really, is a nude photo pornography, child or otherwise? It is a nude. That is very different from a photo suggesting sex or displaying sexual contact.
I have to wonder if the authorities in this case are seriously concerned that if this is left unpunished, the kids will think that it is perfectly ok to send each other nude photos of themselves and there will be rampant "sexting" among the young population? Is that it?
If youtube is going to start carrying government videos, presumably funded by taxpayers, the videos need to be public domain and youtube needs to have a built in mechanism to allow views to save the video. I know there are ways of saving the videos already, but youtube does not provide this functionality.
http://lemonodor.com/archives/001405.html
It does say that the FAA does not approve. The autonomous nature of the aircraft is the big sticking point it seems. As for actual use of UAVs in domestic operations, I don't know of any, but law enforcement seems very interested.
Just try to get a price on the higher end CAD/CAM/CAE software with out talking to a vendor or some other middleman. I can't stand the way the prices are secret. It is like they give different prices to different customers. Just tell me what it costs to buy. If there is volume discounts (for more seats) fine, publish that as well.
I guess you missed the copyright notice in the lower right corner. Imagery was provided by http://www.firstbasesolutions.com/, who provide aerial imagery, not satellite. I don't know about the Google Earth imagery, but the link you provided isn't satellite.
I agree, that satellites are not good at detecting IEDs. My point was, the "article" quoted other sources as saying that satellites can track people indoors. This doesn't pass the smell test with me. If our coverage is that good, then they could help track "insurgents" and we could better protect our troops in a combat zone. My premise is that even with the drones and such, our coverage from above isn't as capable as the article implies.
I've never felt that a satellite can track a passive moving target smaller than a ship. Yes they can image things on order of many centimeters, but due to the nature of orbits, and the fact that there can't be enough satellites above to keep targets in view continuously, a satellite is next to worthless for tracking cars, let alone people. Satellites are very useful to look at stationary targets, large troop movements (the kinds involving tanks, howitzers, helicopters, humvees, etc.), nuclear plants, dams, etc.
If one feels that they can track individuals, then I feel one has been reading too much Tom Clancy. I really fail to see how a satellite can help, even if you have another network of surveillance, unless one is looking for outdoor marijuana crops or something of that scale. There are plenty of terrestrial based surveillance schemes that can be much more useful and cost effective. The article stinks of bullshit to me.
Slashdot Mirror
As in Computer Numeric Control. I'm familiar with machine tools, the tools that shape metals and other solid materials thru material removal, but don't tell a pilot that a computer doesn't help with any physical work.
Of course, you still have to tell it where to go.
The force multiplier for the brain? Civilization. Other human minds. And their products (libraries, universities, etc.).
There's a really big hole in the ground about ten blocks south from where I'm writing this that serves as a warning against your type of over-confidence.
From a Nuke? From an ICBM? Holy shit, where do you live?
Your argument would also keep the Iranians out of commercial aviation.
Yeah, we (in the US) have a big problem defending ourselves. Really big problem.
Yes, and keeping them dumb or engaging in armed conflict is going to change Sharia law. We should get right on it, undermine their society with armed confrontation. That should work out nicely.
Now that is what I call flamebait. Yes, the web "rescued" some un-aired super bowl ads like I "rescued" some girl's virginity. (hypothetically speaking of course)
Curious definition of invaded you have.
That the US and the "west" isn't so special? That smart humans exist in other parts of the world? Yes, let us wake up indeed.
Hint: If your warhead reaches escape velocity, you've bombed someone not on earth.
Why is everyone so worried that Iran will deliver a nuke via ICBM? Really? What if they could deliver ten nukes? At which point should I be worried about another country joining the nuclear club? When they can enrich uranium? When they have a bomb? When they develop rocket technology to a degree with which they can target other countries? When they have several hundred warheads on as many rockets? Really, when should I be concerned, because it seems that ship left port decades ago. Like when then US and the Soviets did it. Now, when can we discard our childish things and become men?
This past Sunday?
Yes, it is very dangerous business, having nude photos of underage persons floating around on the internet. Society will crumble! Thank god they've arrested the perpetrators and will now prevent the victims from being scarred for life because a nude photo of them was seen by everyone. Now the victims will be scarred for life for being labeled a sex offender. Justice is served.
But really, is a nude photo pornography, child or otherwise? It is a nude. That is very different from a photo suggesting sex or displaying sexual contact.
I have to wonder if the authorities in this case are seriously concerned that if this is left unpunished, the kids will think that it is perfectly ok to send each other nude photos of themselves and there will be rampant "sexting" among the young population? Is that it?
I'm a software engineer and I'd be out on the streets if our customers illegally downloaded our software.
If they are illegally downloading your software, they aren't customers.
You're right. We should start comparing them to Israelis. Oh, wait...
If youtube is going to start carrying government videos, presumably funded by taxpayers, the videos need to be public domain and youtube needs to have a built in mechanism to allow views to save the video. I know there are ways of saving the videos already, but youtube does not provide this functionality.
http://lemonodor.com/archives/001405.html It does say that the FAA does not approve. The autonomous nature of the aircraft is the big sticking point it seems. As for actual use of UAVs in domestic operations, I don't know of any, but law enforcement seems very interested.
But then I realized it wasn't even worth it then.
Can we pay McCartney in exchange for not producing anymore music? Ever?
(3+4) * (12-7) = 80
Perhaps I missed something, but I thought that 7 * 5 = 35 Not 80.
Do subscribers get better search functionality? I'm not really whining, but the search sucks. Hence the tagging system?
Just try to get a price on the higher end CAD/CAM/CAE software with out talking to a vendor or some other middleman. I can't stand the way the prices are secret. It is like they give different prices to different customers. Just tell me what it costs to buy. If there is volume discounts (for more seats) fine, publish that as well.
yes. And a lot of content is just fine even in hulu or youtube resoultions. If it is crappy content, then it sucks in HD as well.
Shoot your TV. Burn Hollywood, Burn! Steal this book!
one would be able to detect the remnants of the vaporized corpse and do a DNA analysis on the "vapor"[aerosol] particles.
Remember, they did say that 1984 won't be like 1984.
I guess you missed the copyright notice in the lower right corner. Imagery was provided by http://www.firstbasesolutions.com/, who provide aerial imagery, not satellite. I don't know about the Google Earth imagery, but the link you provided isn't satellite.
Imagine the 2.4 metre mirror from the HST, but pointing towards Earth. Now imagine several of those on-orbit at any one time.
You mean like five? Or is it four? http://www.globalsecurity.org/space/systems/kh-12-flights.htm
Or even if it's ten, we've really got the place well covered, right?
I agree, that satellites are not good at detecting IEDs. My point was, the "article" quoted other sources as saying that satellites can track people indoors. This doesn't pass the smell test with me. If our coverage is that good, then they could help track "insurgents" and we could better protect our troops in a combat zone. My premise is that even with the drones and such, our coverage from above isn't as capable as the article implies.
I've never felt that a satellite can track a passive moving target smaller than a ship. Yes they can image things on order of many centimeters, but due to the nature of orbits, and the fact that there can't be enough satellites above to keep targets in view continuously, a satellite is next to worthless for tracking cars, let alone people. Satellites are very useful to look at stationary targets, large troop movements (the kinds involving tanks, howitzers, helicopters, humvees, etc.), nuclear plants, dams, etc.
If one feels that they can track individuals, then I feel one has been reading too much Tom Clancy. I really fail to see how a satellite can help, even if you have another network of surveillance, unless one is looking for outdoor marijuana crops or something of that scale. There are plenty of terrestrial based surveillance schemes that can be much more useful and cost effective. The article stinks of bullshit to me.