Indeed. When I scrapped one of my cars some years ago, the metal parts were worth far less than the taillights. which were specific to the convertible version and unavailable new from the manufacturer.
Ok, that thing looks awesome, but it's also the size of a small car. What's the price point? $100k? more? I don't see this thing being useful to anyone but large conglomerates.
A few weeks ago, I took a photo of a Cray-1, which cost millions of dollars and isn't much smaller than a small car, on my Android tablet, which cost hundreds of dollars and fits in my pocket. I then ran supercomputer benchmarks on my tablet, and turns out it's several times faster than the Cray.
When technology is allowed to progress without interference, what's expensive today will be in everyone's garage in two or three decades.
The only countries I can see that the F-22 and F-35 could defend America from are Mexico, Canada and Cuba. Canada is buying F-35s, Mexico will probably be down to a few drug-gang Cessnas by the time the F-35 is in operation, and Cuba has airliners full of Canadian tourists.
If you read the history books, you'll also see how the F-4 was going to destroy all opposing aircraft with missiles, so it would never need a gun because they'd never get close enough.
Once it actually got into actual combat in the actual real world, there were sudden orders for a gun pod for close-in dogfights.
The F-22 may be able to hit less stealthy aircraft with missiles from well beyond visual range, but that doesn't help if the rules of engagement won't let them fire missiles at random dots on a radar screen. Also, I was reading recently about new IR trackers which can detect F-22s from well beyond radar range, making radar stealth far less useful.
VNC sucks donkey balls, but that's because it's done in an absolutely insane way where it actually does continuous screen-grabs (of the whole screen), encodes them as JPGs and then sends them over the wire.
No, it doesn', unless you have a really, really braindead implementation which doesn't track which pixels have changedt. But don't let not knowing what you're talking about interfere with your rant.
pretty much every issue you list, is also an issue for the Ipad and most android tablets. It sounds to me that your issue is tablets, not just the surface
Android tablets and iPads don't need 32GB of storage just for the operating system. They also don't need more 8GB of RAM to run the operating system and a few apps.
I think he meant that he has both Linux and Microsoft servers running at his school perhaps with integration using AD.
Do you want to explain exactly what, in his three line post, made you think that? Given that schools and AD and Australia aren't mentioned anywhere in those lines?
But people spend enormous resources to find gold buried in the earth and promptly rebury it in various bank vaults and safes, not any different from finding money buried by the government and depositing them back in the bank accounts.
People spend enormous resources to install windows. Therefore, clearly, the government should stimulate the economy by sending the Army out to smash every window in the country.
Cost is a legitimate concern, but that's hardly a reason to claim it's a horrible product any more than Apple's products (which I do hate, but admit aren't terrible) are.
But, uh, Apple products have the Apple logo on them.
Apple, for good or bad, is a premium brand that many people consider to justify a high price. Microsoft is a cheap crap brand.
Not trying to keep harping on the Falklands', but the Argentinians did fire their last Exocet at HMS Invincible on May 30, 1982.
Yeah, it's true. The Argenitines sank the Invincible, but the British brought in a fake carrier from Area 51 so no-one noticed.
Back in the real world, no-one really knows what they were firing at, since it didn't hit anything. If I remember correctly, they said the Exocets that hit the Atlantic Conveyor were fired at the Invincible too.
The Vietnamese kept shooting down B-52s until they ran out of missiles, causing the worst US bomber losses since WWII. How many were shot down over Iraq?
We could be spending this money on other issues that could do a lot of good plus you don't need an Army when everyone has nuclear bombs.
Sure, if your first response to any kind of attack in the future is going to be nuking them until they glow. Most people would prefer a little less aggressive military policies.
For all of the talk about the dangers posed against carriers from anti-ship missiles, not a single carrier has been sunk or damages from one, despite numerous opportunities. Naval commanders understand the risk, and have developed the necessary tactics and defenses to protect the carriers from this threat.
Number of carriers hit by anti-ship missiles: 0 Number of anti-ship missiles fired at carriers: 0 Number of serious adversaries fought by America since Vietnam: 0
In a relatively evenly-matched fight like the Falklands, ships were regularly damaged and sunk on both sides despite what were state of the art defences at the time. If China and America get into a war, you can be pretty sure there'll be rather less carriers on both sides by the end of the first week.
People make these wild claims and spend tons of extra money for the 2 or 3 times a year they actually leave the city.
That would make some sense, if electric cars didn't cost far more than an equivalent ICE car. The cheapest 'can only drive around the city' electric cars I've seen advertised are around the cost of a Honda Civic, which can drive hundreds of miles without 'recharging', and takes five minutes or less to 'recharge' if you want to go further.
IIRC, a Tesla battery pack has a half-life of 100,000 miles. By the time the average commuter (40mi/day) has burned up the useful life of a Tesla battery pack (hint: we're talking well more than a decade) where does your ICE based car find itself?
Why would you buy an $80,000 electric car to commute 40 miles a day?
If solar cells become efficient enough, then the charge speed is infinite/continuous, and free after the purchase of the vehicle. Gas can't beat that, ever.
I can fit about a square metre of solar cells on top of my car. In ideal conditions, with 100% efficient conversion, that's about 1kW. The Volt's battery capacity is apparently 16kWh, so, in theory, in perfect conditions, the panel could charge the battery enough while I'm at work to give me the power to drive home. I'd still have to plug it in there. It still wouldn't provide enough power for long highway trips, or on overcast days. Or for people who work at night.
In the real world, you'll be lucky to average 10-20% efficiency through the system, between panel losses, imperfect pointing, changes in the solar angle during the year, etc.
I could fit enough on the garage to charge the car every day, but then I'd need a whole storage system to charge from when I get home.
Slashdot Mirror
Yep. That our Congress has lacked the will to call this man on the crimes he has plainly committed is a sign that our government is beginning to fail.
BEGINNING to fail?
Haven't you been watching the news for the last century or so?
The "exigent circumstances" exemption to the 4th amendment effectively nullifies it.
Weird. I don't see that one in my copy of the Constitution. Are you using Constitution 2.0?
Indeed. When I scrapped one of my cars some years ago, the metal parts were worth far less than the taillights. which were specific to the convertible version and unavailable new from the manufacturer.
Ok, that thing looks awesome, but it's also the size of a small car. What's the price point? $100k? more? I don't see this thing being useful to anyone but large conglomerates.
A few weeks ago, I took a photo of a Cray-1, which cost millions of dollars and isn't much smaller than a small car, on my Android tablet, which cost hundreds of dollars and fits in my pocket. I then ran supercomputer benchmarks on my tablet, and turns out it's several times faster than the Cray.
When technology is allowed to progress without interference, what's expensive today will be in everyone's garage in two or three decades.
The only countries I can see that the F-22 and F-35 could defend America from are Mexico, Canada and Cuba. Canada is buying F-35s, Mexico will probably be down to a few drug-gang Cessnas by the time the F-35 is in operation, and Cuba has airliners full of Canadian tourists.
If you read the history books, you'll also see how the F-4 was going to destroy all opposing aircraft with missiles, so it would never need a gun because they'd never get close enough.
Once it actually got into actual combat in the actual real world, there were sudden orders for a gun pod for close-in dogfights.
The F-22 may be able to hit less stealthy aircraft with missiles from well beyond visual range, but that doesn't help if the rules of engagement won't let them fire missiles at random dots on a radar screen. Also, I was reading recently about new IR trackers which can detect F-22s from well beyond radar range, making radar stealth far less useful.
Where were these turds when Bush rammed through the PATRIOT Act?
'Rammed through?'
This isn't Obamacare we're talking about. Almost everyone on both sides voted for the PATRIOT Act.
Voting against the PATRIOT act would have been unpatriotic!
Some guys who worked on Xorg/X11 for years are redesigning it to be better.
Yes.
'Xorg sucks, but this new interface it will be much better. Trust us! We wrote Xorg!'
VNC sucks donkey balls, but that's because it's done in an absolutely insane way where it actually does continuous screen-grabs (of the whole screen), encodes them as JPGs and then sends them over the wire.
No, it doesn', unless you have a really, really braindead implementation which doesn't track which pixels have changedt. But don't let not knowing what you're talking about interfere with your rant.
pretty much every issue you list, is also an issue for the Ipad and most android tablets. It sounds to me that your issue is tablets, not just the surface
Android tablets and iPads don't need 32GB of storage just for the operating system. They also don't need more 8GB of RAM to run the operating system and a few apps.
I think he meant that he has both Linux and Microsoft servers running at his school perhaps with integration using AD.
Do you want to explain exactly what, in his three line post, made you think that? Given that schools and AD and Australia aren't mentioned anywhere in those lines?
But people spend enormous resources to find gold buried in the earth and promptly rebury it in various bank vaults and safes, not any different from finding money buried by the government and depositing them back in the bank accounts.
People spend enormous resources to install windows. Therefore, clearly, the government should stimulate the economy by sending the Army out to smash every window in the country.
Come on, you know it makes sense.
Didn't they just write off a billion on the Surface For ReTards?
So, yeah, they've almost certainly lost a ton of money on the Surface so far.
Why would you want a touchscreen and pen input on a laptop?
You use a touchscreen as a poor substitute for a keyboard and mouse... and a laptop already has both.
Cost is a legitimate concern, but that's hardly a reason to claim it's a horrible product any more than Apple's products (which I do hate, but admit aren't terrible) are.
But, uh, Apple products have the Apple logo on them.
Apple, for good or bad, is a premium brand that many people consider to justify a high price. Microsoft is a cheap crap brand.
Nobody, and I mean NOBODY designs environments to run on either Windows or Linux.
I'm trying to figure out whether you're using some subtle definition of 'environment' or 'nobody' that I don't understand, or just a retard.
Why not, you know, just buy a laptop? It'll cost less, it'll probably have a 1080 display built in, and you can, you know, upgrade the RAM.
Not trying to keep harping on the Falklands', but the Argentinians did fire their last Exocet at HMS Invincible on May 30, 1982.
Yeah, it's true. The Argenitines sank the Invincible, but the British brought in a fake carrier from Area 51 so no-one noticed.
Back in the real world, no-one really knows what they were firing at, since it didn't hit anything. If I remember correctly, they said the Exocets that hit the Atlantic Conveyor were fired at the Invincible too.
How was Vietnam more serious than Iraq?
The Vietnamese could shoot back.
The Vietnamese kept shooting down B-52s until they ran out of missiles, causing the worst US bomber losses since WWII. How many were shot down over Iraq?
We could be spending this money on other issues that could do a lot of good plus you don't need an Army when everyone has nuclear bombs.
Sure, if your first response to any kind of attack in the future is going to be nuking them until they glow. Most people would prefer a little less aggressive military policies.
For all of the talk about the dangers posed against carriers from anti-ship missiles, not a single carrier has been sunk or damages from one, despite numerous opportunities. Naval commanders understand the risk, and have developed the necessary tactics and defenses to protect the carriers from this threat.
Number of carriers hit by anti-ship missiles: 0
Number of anti-ship missiles fired at carriers: 0
Number of serious adversaries fought by America since Vietnam: 0
In a relatively evenly-matched fight like the Falklands, ships were regularly damaged and sunk on both sides despite what were state of the art defences at the time. If China and America get into a war, you can be pretty sure there'll be rather less carriers on both sides by the end of the first week.
People make these wild claims and spend tons of extra money for the 2 or 3 times a year they actually leave the city.
That would make some sense, if electric cars didn't cost far more than an equivalent ICE car. The cheapest 'can only drive around the city' electric cars I've seen advertised are around the cost of a Honda Civic, which can drive hundreds of miles without 'recharging', and takes five minutes or less to 'recharge' if you want to go further.
IIRC, a Tesla battery pack has a half-life of 100,000 miles. By the time the average commuter (40mi/day) has burned up the useful life of a Tesla battery pack (hint: we're talking well more than a decade) where does your ICE based car find itself?
Why would you buy an $80,000 electric car to commute 40 miles a day?
If solar cells become efficient enough, then the charge speed is infinite/continuous, and free after the purchase of the vehicle. Gas can't beat that, ever.
I can fit about a square metre of solar cells on top of my car. In ideal conditions, with 100% efficient conversion, that's about 1kW. The Volt's battery capacity is apparently 16kWh, so, in theory, in perfect conditions, the panel could charge the battery enough while I'm at work to give me the power to drive home. I'd still have to plug it in there. It still wouldn't provide enough power for long highway trips, or on overcast days. Or for people who work at night.
In the real world, you'll be lucky to average 10-20% efficiency through the system, between panel losses, imperfect pointing, changes in the solar angle during the year, etc.
I could fit enough on the garage to charge the car every day, but then I'd need a whole storage system to charge from when I get home.