The only thing different about drones is that they are slow and hence easier seen.
No, absolutely not! Motion is much easier to see. Consider a deer; hard to spot when it's standing still, much easier once it starts moving.
The easiest way spot other aircraft when I'm flying (did I mention I'm a student pilot?) is because of their apparent motion against a (usually contrasting) background. When birds or other aircraft are at the same altitude as me they appear just about on the horizon, and they're much harder to spot. Even gliders with 15-18 meter wingspans are tough to spot when they're at the same altitude - in fact, head-on collisions is a big safety issue that can even trip up top glider pilots (http://www.flarm.com/news/presscoverage/SSA_MainArticle_201405.pdf - the description on page 1 is particularly enlightening, and the graphic on page 3 shows the relative size of gliders relative to the time left to react). Drones are small and seeing one directly in front of me would NOT be easy.
There is zero new risk here and history shows that there is zero actual risk in this as nobody ever brought down a commercial airliner with a model airplane or helicopter. AFAIK it has not even been tried, ever.
The problem with this argument is that traditional model aircraft pilots didn't have cameras on their planes/helis. Now that drones come with them pre-installed, their pilots can fly at much longer range and without direct line of sight - traditional model aircraft pilots need to constantly watch their aircraft to keep it under control. Imagine the difficulty of hitting a target when your R/C heli is a few hundred feet away. Then imagine using an onboard camera to watch your target approach.
Now if you'd said that laws wouldn't prevent a terrorist from doing this, I'd agree with you. If you'd said that an outright ban on drones is unreasonable and untenable, I'd agree with you. I'd have even agreed if you'd said that the chances are slim of a terrorist actually using a drone maliciously. Where I strongly disagree is saying that the threat level hasn't changed. Technology has made drones more readily accessible and easier to pilot in a malicious manner, one need only look at the increased reports of near misses to realize that the number of drones being flown recklessly is increasing.
Birds may be heavier, but the various pieces of the many types of drones are harder and sharper; I don't know how you can say with such certainty that birds are more dangerous. Do you have any evidence to back up your claim? I know of no studies regarding drone strikes, let alone comparing them to bird strikes.
Also, birds are animals and can't really be regulated. People are - in theory at least, I'm beginning to doubt the practical applications - smarter and ought to know better.
I know it would add cost but as someone else said why doesn't the FAA require a license and transponders on drones so that everyone knows what's in the air and who owns it?
With identity information, you're talking about a mode S transponder. These things are more expensive than you probably think.
Also, because the USA is really big, and (lesser, mode C) transponders aren't even required for flying in most airspace: you need one in class A airspace ( > 18,000ft MSL), in or above class B & C airspace (near large airports, with larger radii at higher altitudes), in the mode C veil around class B airports (an even bigger cylinder around the biggest airports), and > 10,000ft MSL unless you're < 2,500ft AGL.
Simple, right?</sarcasm>
So basically, transponders are only currently required at higher altitudes and near large airports. ATC is simply too busy dealing with the current air traffic to handle the rest of the country's airspace.
Background: I am a student pilot, with ~35 hours in power planes and ~20 hours in gliders.
Define a few feet please.
The FAA has this definition which seems especially relevant in this discussion.
And do pilots also report to the FAA everytime they pass "within a few feet" of a bird?
It's quite common for pilots to radio their controller when they encounter a hazard. That's how your pilot knows to turn on the "fasten seatbelt" light when you're approaching turbulence; the same goes for flocks of birds or unidentified aircraft. Even so, it's not really fair to compare birds drones, for the same reason that deer don't get jaywalking tickets.
I can say through personal experience that just seeing other aircraft / birds takes a huge amount of my attention, even when the other gliders have 15-18 meter wingspans. Drones are much smaller than manned aircraft and they tend to move very slowly, making them even harder to see. The problem of seeing other gliders is a big enough issue where someone developed a technology called FLARM to reduce the number of collisions by notifying pilots of other gliders within ~4km; it has already saved many lives despite being only 10 years old.
So when I'm flying, I spend a large amount of my time looking for other aircraft. My eyes have much better resolution and FoV than a drone's camera, and I can swing my head around to look from side to side, and up & down - this gives me a better capability to look for hazards. Birds also tend to have good eyes & ears. There is a very good incentive for us to be vigilant: our lives are at stake.
On the other hand, drone pilots only have a camera, hooked up to a low-resolution video screen, which they would need to aim all around in order to scan for other aircraft. The problem is magnified by the fact that have a poor incentive to look for collision hazards: they have a few hundred dollars at stake, and they're probably already using the same camera to look at something on the ground.
The FAA has been hell bent on gaining government control over drones and they will make up any excuse they can, the scarier the better.
Sorry, I just don't buy the regulatory overreach argument in this case. My life could be put in jeopardy by someone playing with their new toy while I'm already flying low and slow on final approach; the last thing I need is another distraction when I'll be touching down (one way or another) within 15 seconds.
I would wager that most of the people writing the regulations are pilots of some capacity, and those who aren't certainly have ready access to many extremely experienced pilots; these people are just trying to protect the lives of millions of airline passengers, flight crew, and pilots.
My wife got a Nielsen survey this year. She obliged them by dutifully filling out the book, and near the end of the week I glanced through it. I was surprised that she listed me as having watched TV with her nearly every day, when in truth I had only watched about 1-2 hours of TV in the whole week, and that was on Netflix.
I'm not sure why she lied in the diary, but it certainly cast the Nielsen ratings in a different light for me.
I find myself strongly favoring the cooperative board and card games I've played in the last few years. Sentinels of the Multiverse, Forbidden Island & Forbidden Desert, Hanabi, and Pandemic are excellent and the experience of working together is something that I never thought I'd find outside of a computer game.
Holy shit, after reading these comments I feel incredibly lucky.
I graduated HS in 2000, and to make a quick comparison to what I'm reading here:
- I took AP Calc, AP Physics, and AP Comp Sci but my (public) HS offered lots of other AP courses.
- The teachers were made available (my AP Physics class had 8 students - again, in a public school) and they all taught the material instead of the test.
- My AP Comp Science teacher actually knew the material and cared about his students. We had new(ish) computers and a Linux (or Unix - I didn't know the difference at the time) box to log in to.
For taking these 3 exams I got a semester's worth of credits when I went to college. Those 20 credits put me far enough ahead to take classes towards - and eventually earn - a dual degree.
These programs do pay off. I'm glad I had teachers who cared enough to fight for the students, and an administration who listened.
To all of the AP teachers out there, thank you for doing what you do. Especially you, Mr Baciewicz.
If you're interested in learning to fly, see if your area has any glider operations. It is usually significantly cheaper to fly a glider than a power plane. The club I joined last fall gets me in the air for less than half the cost of flying a power plane (depending on weather) and in my opinion, I am getting a better education than I did in power planes.
I could easily see the object being popped of of the top of his chute and then falling past him.
Because everyone knows that parachutes are ejected with explosive charges, or in the more modern versions, a bottle of compressed air.
I have gone skydiving, and the acceleration (or decelaration if you prefer) is rather violent. Without doing the math, I very much doubt that anything would be "popped off the top of the chute".
Another possible explanation is that the object fell from either the plane or another skydiver (as he was first out of the plane). I would deem this unlikely, but far more likely than a meteorite.
A rock of that size does not simply find its way into a plane, or into a skydiver's pocket. Gravel-sized rocks, sure. Something the size of your fist? No, just no.
I would like to take the opportunity to point out that the article is dead wrong on one specific point. In New York, the highest court is the Court of Appeals, not the Supreme Court proof.
A lot of the engineers I've known who worked on military equipment do consider the ethical implications of their work. They feel they are helping protect our troops...
I graduated with a dual BS in Mechanical Engineering and Computer Science. At graduation time, I very much wanted to be an engineer rather than a programmer, but I also didn't want to contribute to war in any capacity; so I narrowly focused my job search on employers who were NOT in the defense sector. Nearly everyone I told about my decision gave me the very same argument as you. My self-imposed restrictions certainly made my job search harder, so I expanded my search to programming where I found a satisfying career path that has absolutely nothing to do with engineering. Que sera sera.
The joke goes like this: What's the difference between Civil Engineers and Mechanical Engineers? Mechanical Engineers make weapons and Civil Engineers make targets.
Thank you for your input, AC. I'll try to explain why you're wrong.
There are millions of AR-15s owned by responsible people who will never use them to "cause mass mayhem". I own one and I use it for target shooting - I shoot paper targets at a proper range. Why do I need it? Well I guess I could use something else, but the AR-15 is widely available, easily customizable - there are lots of add-ons on the market that let me customize it to fit me just the way I like, it's cheap to shoot, and it's accurate. When I'm done with it for the day, it comes home with me and goes in the gun safe. A friend of mine uses his M14 (which is, by the way, 100% legal after this law even though it has 10-round magazines and has a much higher muzzle energy) for the same purpose - but his cost to shoot is higher. Most of the people who I shoot with at the matches also have AR-15s for the same reasons.
Other people use their AR-15s for hunting or for self-defense in the home (I would argue that a shotgun loaded with bird shot is a much better option for home defense, but I digress). Because they look scary though, and because a few of them were used by troubled people to do evil things, now the vast majority of us - who will never use them irresponsibly - need to suffer.
I'm not going to risk making a flawed analogy, but I resent the fact that people who know nothing about the safe handling of firearms and who have obviously never been to a shooting range can tell those of us who do and have, our own business. I suspect (since we're on slashdot) that we can agree that rules by people who aren't "in the know" often have the tendency of being profoundly misguided.
To prevent, among other things, unauthorized and unlicensed use of guns, section 47 of the bill adds a new Penal Law 265.45 establishing safe storage requirements for rifles, shotguns and firearms. Under this new section, a gun owner who lives with someone who the owner has reason to know is prohibited from possessing a gun because the prohibited person has been convicted of a crime punishable by a term of imprisonment exceeding one year, has been adjudicated mentally defective or committed to a mental institution, is subject to a court order of protection or has been convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence whose sentence has been completed in the last five years must, when the gun is out of the owner's immediate control, keep the gun secured in a safe storage depository (for example, a safe or similar secure container with a lock that can be opened only with a key or combination, or other locking mechanism) or render it incapable of being fired by putting a safety lock on the gun.
This year the goal is to throw flying discs (frisbees) through goals of different heights (both in the sense of how high off the ground they are and how tall they are), and to get bonus points (awarded after the 2:15 match time runs out) by climbing a pyramid of bars (kind of like monkey bars on a playground, but a pyramid). The robots can weigh as much as 120#. Click here or look on YouTube for Ultimate Ascent.
On the topic of autonomous robots, the first 15 seconds of each match ARE autonomous! The thing is that each team (of high schoolers) is given 6 weeks from learning the rules of the game to design, build, write code for, and test their robot. Asking a team (which could have as few as 3 or 4 mentors and 5 high schoolers) to do that, and make the robot autonomous, is just asking too much. Even the bigger teams (I mentor for Team 250 - The Dynamos - and I am one of about 20 mentors and there are a few dozen students) have a hard enough time making the robot functional.
Lastly, it is very much against the spirit of FIRST to intentionally damage the other teams' robot; doing so will get you penalized and maybe even disqualified from the match. That doesn't mean no pushing and shoving though - playing defense is a valid strategy, but the game rules are designed to prevent damaging the other bots. In fact there are two term that are used widely in FIRST, gracious professionalism and coopertition. It is a common sight at competitions to see a team with a broken robot (either smoke pouring out or it just doesn't work) and people from other teams giving them parts, advice, and labor to get them back on the field.
I agree with a lot of other people on these, but I'm going to try to put a word out for my favorite comics that don't usually get the light of day.
Best overall:
I've been reading Supernormal Step since it was about a week old, and it quickly turned into my favorite comic. The art started out a bit amateurish, but has matured rather nicely. The characters are unique and likeable, the plot is constantly moving and twisting, and I'm quite happy with the small number of grammatical errors compared to a lot of the other comics I read.
Funniest:
Already mentioned, but go check out Gunshow (frequently NSFW). I love this one because the situations are so absurd. Both the serial comics and the one-offs are completely unpredictable (Wolves, Friday the 13th, Rabbits, Skulls). Honorable mention to The Non-Adventures of Wonderella.
Best art:
Also already mentioned, but for good reason: Dresden Codak is beautiful. I would have voted for Copper, but Kazu seems to have taken a hiatus from it and this IS supposed to be a list from 2012.
Most relevant to me:
This is a tough one, I don't really read comics for relevance. I'll put this out there though: Octopus Pie has some of the most REAL characters I've ever seen in a comic or webcomic.
Take this opportunity to reorganize and clean up your desk, you're going to start fresh!
1) Disconnect everything and clean up on/around your desk. Dust your monitors, wipe down the surface, move any papers that are piled up. When I dealt with rat nests of wires, I never was able to vacuum/dust. Do it now when it is easiest.
2) Put your desk on sliders. Even the heaviest hardwood desk on carpet becomes easy to move alone when you do this. If you're on hardwood or some other surface, clean around the desk before moving it, or you'll scratch it up.
3) Leave the desk away from the wall so you can get behind it. Set up everything exactly how you want it, but leave the loose cables wherever you put them before and leave the other cables (mouse, keyboard) bundled up next to their owners.
Now you're ready for the fun part!
Think about how you want to route the cables; that means don't let them touch the floor! I love routing them under the desk surface in the back because they're pretty much invisible and the cats don't chew on them. If you have a cheap fiberboard desk like I do, consider using screw-in hooks (use a small nail to make a pilot hole). If you have a metal/glass or an otherwise nice desk, use sticky hooks (3M Command hooks are usually too big - I like cable tie mounts with zip/twist ties set into a loose loop).
Start with the cables for the devices you'll move the least; this probably means your power strip, modem & router, and other network cables (I like to mount these to the side/back of my desk so they're out of the way but close to everything - this is especially important with the power strip). Move on to the monitors & speakers, then the external hard drives & USB hubs. The last things you want to hook up are probably your keyboard & mouse.
1) Once you've connected the device, stop and take a look at the cables; anything that you can group together, wrap it in spiral cable wrap, starting at the device and going back. Two network cables from the router to your towers? Wrap them together. Your monitor's DVI & power cables? Wrap them. Be sure to give yourself enough length of wrapped cable so you can move your devices around as far as you think you'll want to.
2) Now you take up any slack in the cable by bundling it - just be sure to leave a little bit of slack in the cable - just enough so it has a nice bend radius at the computer/router/wall. Hang the bundles together from a hook/anchor in an inconspicuous place. Use N+1 ties so you can get at it later - one for the hook/anchor, and one for each bundle (I especially love using twist ties for this part):
- For small DC cables, wrap the extra length neatly around 4 fingers, flatten the bundle. Secure with a twist / zip / velcro tie.
- For bigger cables, hold it in your palm and keep reversing direction across your palm - leave a reasonable bend radius. Secure it as above.
- For network cables; buy a crimping tool and learn to use it.
Push your desk back into place and you're done! Use weighted cable managers or adhesive to hold USB hubs from falling off your desk and enjoy!
1) I live in NY. My electors' votes will go to Obama so essentially my vote for POTUS doesn't count; feels bad, man.
2) I want to send a message in the strongest possible way that the two-party system is broken, and the strongest way I can think to do so is with my vote.
I wish this hadn't been modded -1 Troll. A troll "is a prank comment intended to provoke indignant (or just confused) responses" (source).
Whenever the topic of drug legalization comes up - no matter the venue - this argument crops up. Just because it doesn't hold water to those of us on the "tax and legalize" side doesn't make it a troll, it just makes it an argument for the other side.
tl;dr I don't agree with parent either, but that doesn't make his/her post a troll.
Slashdot Mirror
The FCC complaint office is useless. I've submitted multiple complaints for robo calls and have never heard back from them.
The only thing different about drones is that they are slow and hence easier seen.
No, absolutely not! Motion is much easier to see. Consider a deer; hard to spot when it's standing still, much easier once it starts moving.
The easiest way spot other aircraft when I'm flying (did I mention I'm a student pilot?) is because of their apparent motion against a (usually contrasting) background. When birds or other aircraft are at the same altitude as me they appear just about on the horizon, and they're much harder to spot. Even gliders with 15-18 meter wingspans are tough to spot when they're at the same altitude - in fact, head-on collisions is a big safety issue that can even trip up top glider pilots (http://www.flarm.com/news/presscoverage/SSA_MainArticle_201405.pdf - the description on page 1 is particularly enlightening, and the graphic on page 3 shows the relative size of gliders relative to the time left to react). Drones are small and seeing one directly in front of me would NOT be easy.
There is zero new risk here and history shows that there is zero actual risk in this as nobody ever brought down a commercial airliner with a model airplane or helicopter. AFAIK it has not even been tried, ever.
The problem with this argument is that traditional model aircraft pilots didn't have cameras on their planes/helis. Now that drones come with them pre-installed, their pilots can fly at much longer range and without direct line of sight - traditional model aircraft pilots need to constantly watch their aircraft to keep it under control. Imagine the difficulty of hitting a target when your R/C heli is a few hundred feet away. Then imagine using an onboard camera to watch your target approach.
Now if you'd said that laws wouldn't prevent a terrorist from doing this, I'd agree with you. If you'd said that an outright ban on drones is unreasonable and untenable, I'd agree with you. I'd have even agreed if you'd said that the chances are slim of a terrorist actually using a drone maliciously. Where I strongly disagree is saying that the threat level hasn't changed. Technology has made drones more readily accessible and easier to pilot in a malicious manner, one need only look at the increased reports of near misses to realize that the number of drones being flown recklessly is increasing.
Those who would trade essential liberty for temporary safety deserve neither.
Oh, we're debating using quotations now?
Your right to swing your arms ends just where the other man's nose begins.
Birds may be heavier, but the various pieces of the many types of drones are harder and sharper; I don't know how you can say with such certainty that birds are more dangerous. Do you have any evidence to back up your claim? I know of no studies regarding drone strikes, let alone comparing them to bird strikes.
Also, birds are animals and can't really be regulated. People are - in theory at least, I'm beginning to doubt the practical applications - smarter and ought to know better.
I know it would add cost but as someone else said why doesn't the FAA require a license and transponders on drones so that everyone knows what's in the air and who owns it?
With identity information, you're talking about a mode S transponder. These things are more expensive than you probably think.
Also, because the USA is really big, and (lesser, mode C) transponders aren't even required for flying in most airspace: you need one in class A airspace ( > 18,000ft MSL), in or above class B & C airspace (near large airports, with larger radii at higher altitudes), in the mode C veil around class B airports (an even bigger cylinder around the biggest airports), and > 10,000ft MSL unless you're < 2,500ft AGL.
Simple, right?</sarcasm>
So basically, transponders are only currently required at higher altitudes and near large airports. ATC is simply too busy dealing with the current air traffic to handle the rest of the country's airspace.
Define a few feet please.
The FAA has this definition which seems especially relevant in this discussion.
And do pilots also report to the FAA everytime they pass "within a few feet" of a bird?
It's quite common for pilots to radio their controller when they encounter a hazard. That's how your pilot knows to turn on the "fasten seatbelt" light when you're approaching turbulence; the same goes for flocks of birds or unidentified aircraft. Even so, it's not really fair to compare birds drones, for the same reason that deer don't get jaywalking tickets.
I can say through personal experience that just seeing other aircraft / birds takes a huge amount of my attention, even when the other gliders have 15-18 meter wingspans. Drones are much smaller than manned aircraft and they tend to move very slowly, making them even harder to see. The problem of seeing other gliders is a big enough issue where someone developed a technology called FLARM to reduce the number of collisions by notifying pilots of other gliders within ~4km; it has already saved many lives despite being only 10 years old.
So when I'm flying, I spend a large amount of my time looking for other aircraft. My eyes have much better resolution and FoV than a drone's camera, and I can swing my head around to look from side to side, and up & down - this gives me a better capability to look for hazards. Birds also tend to have good eyes & ears. There is a very good incentive for us to be vigilant: our lives are at stake.
On the other hand, drone pilots only have a camera, hooked up to a low-resolution video screen, which they would need to aim all around in order to scan for other aircraft. The problem is magnified by the fact that have a poor incentive to look for collision hazards: they have a few hundred dollars at stake, and they're probably already using the same camera to look at something on the ground.
The FAA has been hell bent on gaining government control over drones and they will make up any excuse they can, the scarier the better.
Sorry, I just don't buy the regulatory overreach argument in this case. My life could be put in jeopardy by someone playing with their new toy while I'm already flying low and slow on final approach; the last thing I need is another distraction when I'll be touching down (one way or another) within 15 seconds.
I would wager that most of the people writing the regulations are pilots of some capacity, and those who aren't certainly have ready access to many extremely experienced pilots; these people are just trying to protect the lives of millions of airline passengers, flight crew, and pilots.
My wife got a Nielsen survey this year. She obliged them by dutifully filling out the book, and near the end of the week I glanced through it. I was surprised that she listed me as having watched TV with her nearly every day, when in truth I had only watched about 1-2 hours of TV in the whole week, and that was on Netflix.
I'm not sure why she lied in the diary, but it certainly cast the Nielsen ratings in a different light for me.
I find myself strongly favoring the cooperative board and card games I've played in the last few years. Sentinels of the Multiverse, Forbidden Island & Forbidden Desert, Hanabi, and Pandemic are excellent and the experience of working together is something that I never thought I'd find outside of a computer game.
Holy shit, after reading these comments I feel incredibly lucky.
I graduated HS in 2000, and to make a quick comparison to what I'm reading here:
- I took AP Calc, AP Physics, and AP Comp Sci but my (public) HS offered lots of other AP courses.
- The teachers were made available (my AP Physics class had 8 students - again, in a public school) and they all taught the material instead of the test.
- My AP Comp Science teacher actually knew the material and cared about his students. We had new(ish) computers and a Linux (or Unix - I didn't know the difference at the time) box to log in to.
For taking these 3 exams I got a semester's worth of credits when I went to college. Those 20 credits put me far enough ahead to take classes towards - and eventually earn - a dual degree.
These programs do pay off. I'm glad I had teachers who cared enough to fight for the students, and an administration who listened. To all of the AP teachers out there, thank you for doing what you do. Especially you, Mr Baciewicz.
If you're interested in learning to fly, see if your area has any glider operations. It is usually significantly cheaper to fly a glider than a power plane. The club I joined last fall gets me in the air for less than half the cost of flying a power plane (depending on weather) and in my opinion, I am getting a better education than I did in power planes.
I could easily see the object being popped of of the top of his chute and then falling past him.
Because everyone knows that parachutes are ejected with explosive charges, or in the more modern versions, a bottle of compressed air.
I have gone skydiving, and the acceleration (or decelaration if you prefer) is rather violent. Without doing the math, I very much doubt that anything would be "popped off the top of the chute".
Another possible explanation is that the object fell from either the plane or another skydiver (as he was first out of the plane). I would deem this unlikely, but far more likely than a meteorite.
A rock of that size does not simply find its way into a plane, or into a skydiver's pocket. Gravel-sized rocks, sure. Something the size of your fist? No, just no.
I would like to take the opportunity to point out that the article is dead wrong on one specific point. In New York, the highest court is the Court of Appeals, not the Supreme Court proof.
A lot of the engineers I've known who worked on military equipment do consider the ethical implications of their work. They feel they are helping protect our troops ...
I graduated with a dual BS in Mechanical Engineering and Computer Science. At graduation time, I very much wanted to be an engineer rather than a programmer, but I also didn't want to contribute to war in any capacity; so I narrowly focused my job search on employers who were NOT in the defense sector. Nearly everyone I told about my decision gave me the very same argument as you. My self-imposed restrictions certainly made my job search harder, so I expanded my search to programming where I found a satisfying career path that has absolutely nothing to do with engineering. Que sera sera.
The joke goes like this: What's the difference between Civil Engineers and Mechanical Engineers? Mechanical Engineers make weapons and Civil Engineers make targets.
My sig thanks you for mentioning the 7th Guest
Probably. One of the most fun things about scientific discoveries and breakthroughs is how they tend to bleed over into other fields.
Ten years ago, would you have guessed that advances in AI and natural language processing would lead to better cancer treatment? Do you think that 50 years ago, anyone would guess that the space program would lead to better thermometers, highways, baby food, water purification, ovens, or mine safety?
Oh no. You might have to use a less powerful toy. Your poor liberty and freedom!
Did you even read my post? If anything, I'll switch to use a MORE powerful toy because of this law.
Thank you for your input, AC. I'll try to explain why you're wrong.
There are millions of AR-15s owned by responsible people who will never use them to "cause mass mayhem". I own one and I use it for target shooting - I shoot paper targets at a proper range. Why do I need it? Well I guess I could use something else, but the AR-15 is widely available, easily customizable - there are lots of add-ons on the market that let me customize it to fit me just the way I like, it's cheap to shoot, and it's accurate. When I'm done with it for the day, it comes home with me and goes in the gun safe. A friend of mine uses his M14 (which is, by the way, 100% legal after this law even though it has 10-round magazines and has a much higher muzzle energy) for the same purpose - but his cost to shoot is higher. Most of the people who I shoot with at the matches also have AR-15s for the same reasons.
Other people use their AR-15s for hunting or for self-defense in the home (I would argue that a shotgun loaded with bird shot is a much better option for home defense, but I digress). Because they look scary though, and because a few of them were used by troubled people to do evil things, now the vast majority of us - who will never use them irresponsibly - need to suffer.
I'm not going to risk making a flawed analogy, but I resent the fact that people who know nothing about the safe handling of firearms and who have obviously never been to a shooting range can tell those of us who do and have, our own business. I suspect (since we're on slashdot) that we can agree that rules by people who aren't "in the know" often have the tendency of being profoundly misguided.
How about house-holding - if someone in the same residence is a registered gun owner, will they be forced to surrender their weapons?
From the bill:
Safe Storage
To prevent, among other things, unauthorized and unlicensed use of guns, section 47 of the bill adds a new Penal Law 265.45 establishing safe storage requirements for rifles, shotguns and firearms. Under this new section, a gun owner who lives with someone who the owner has reason to know is prohibited from possessing a gun because the prohibited person has been convicted of a crime punishable by a term of imprisonment exceeding one year, has been adjudicated mentally defective or committed to a mental institution, is subject to a court order of protection or has been convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence whose sentence has been completed in the last five years must, when the gun is out of the owner's immediate control, keep the gun secured in a safe storage depository (for example, a safe or similar secure container with a lock that can be opened only with a key or combination, or other locking mechanism) or render it incapable of being fired by putting a safety lock on the gun.
This year the goal is to throw flying discs (frisbees) through goals of different heights (both in the sense of how high off the ground they are and how tall they are), and to get bonus points (awarded after the 2:15 match time runs out) by climbing a pyramid of bars (kind of like monkey bars on a playground, but a pyramid). The robots can weigh as much as 120#. Click here or look on YouTube for Ultimate Ascent.
On the topic of autonomous robots, the first 15 seconds of each match ARE autonomous! The thing is that each team (of high schoolers) is given 6 weeks from learning the rules of the game to design, build, write code for, and test their robot. Asking a team (which could have as few as 3 or 4 mentors and 5 high schoolers) to do that, and make the robot autonomous, is just asking too much. Even the bigger teams (I mentor for Team 250 - The Dynamos - and I am one of about 20 mentors and there are a few dozen students) have a hard enough time making the robot functional.
Lastly, it is very much against the spirit of FIRST to intentionally damage the other teams' robot; doing so will get you penalized and maybe even disqualified from the match. That doesn't mean no pushing and shoving though - playing defense is a valid strategy, but the game rules are designed to prevent damaging the other bots. In fact there are two term that are used widely in FIRST, gracious professionalism and coopertition. It is a common sight at competitions to see a team with a broken robot (either smoke pouring out or it just doesn't work) and people from other teams giving them parts, advice, and labor to get them back on the field.
I agree with a lot of other people on these, but I'm going to try to put a word out for my favorite comics that don't usually get the light of day.
Best overall:
I've been reading Supernormal Step since it was about a week old, and it quickly turned into my favorite comic. The art started out a bit amateurish, but has matured rather nicely. The characters are unique and likeable, the plot is constantly moving and twisting, and I'm quite happy with the small number of grammatical errors compared to a lot of the other comics I read.
Funniest:
Already mentioned, but go check out Gunshow (frequently NSFW). I love this one because the situations are so absurd. Both the serial comics and the one-offs are completely unpredictable (Wolves, Friday the 13th, Rabbits, Skulls). Honorable mention to The Non-Adventures of Wonderella.
Best art:
Also already mentioned, but for good reason: Dresden Codak is beautiful. I would have voted for Copper, but Kazu seems to have taken a hiatus from it and this IS supposed to be a list from 2012.
Most relevant to me:
This is a tough one, I don't really read comics for relevance. I'll put this out there though: Octopus Pie has some of the most REAL characters I've ever seen in a comic or webcomic.
Take this opportunity to reorganize and clean up your desk, you're going to start fresh!
1) Disconnect everything and clean up on/around your desk. Dust your monitors, wipe down the surface, move any papers that are piled up. When I dealt with rat nests of wires, I never was able to vacuum/dust. Do it now when it is easiest.
2) Put your desk on sliders. Even the heaviest hardwood desk on carpet becomes easy to move alone when you do this. If you're on hardwood or some other surface, clean around the desk before moving it, or you'll scratch it up.
3) Leave the desk away from the wall so you can get behind it. Set up everything exactly how you want it, but leave the loose cables wherever you put them before and leave the other cables (mouse, keyboard) bundled up next to their owners.
Now you're ready for the fun part!
Think about how you want to route the cables; that means don't let them touch the floor! I love routing them under the desk surface in the back because they're pretty much invisible and the cats don't chew on them. If you have a cheap fiberboard desk like I do, consider using screw-in hooks (use a small nail to make a pilot hole). If you have a metal/glass or an otherwise nice desk, use sticky hooks (3M Command hooks are usually too big - I like cable tie mounts with zip/twist ties set into a loose loop).
Start with the cables for the devices you'll move the least; this probably means your power strip, modem & router, and other network cables (I like to mount these to the side/back of my desk so they're out of the way but close to everything - this is especially important with the power strip). Move on to the monitors & speakers, then the external hard drives & USB hubs. The last things you want to hook up are probably your keyboard & mouse.
1) Once you've connected the device, stop and take a look at the cables; anything that you can group together, wrap it in spiral cable wrap, starting at the device and going back. Two network cables from the router to your towers? Wrap them together. Your monitor's DVI & power cables? Wrap them. Be sure to give yourself enough length of wrapped cable so you can move your devices around as far as you think you'll want to.
2) Now you take up any slack in the cable by bundling it - just be sure to leave a little bit of slack in the cable - just enough so it has a nice bend radius at the computer/router/wall. Hang the bundles together from a hook/anchor in an inconspicuous place. Use N+1 ties so you can get at it later - one for the hook/anchor, and one for each bundle (I especially love using twist ties for this part):
- For small DC cables, wrap the extra length neatly around 4 fingers, flatten the bundle. Secure with a twist / zip / velcro tie.
- For bigger cables, hold it in your palm and keep reversing direction across your palm - leave a reasonable bend radius. Secure it as above.
- For network cables; buy a crimping tool and learn to use it.
Push your desk back into place and you're done! Use weighted cable managers or adhesive to hold USB hubs from falling off your desk and enjoy!
1) I live in NY. My electors' votes will go to Obama so essentially my vote for POTUS doesn't count; feels bad, man.
2) I want to send a message in the strongest possible way that the two-party system is broken, and the strongest way I can think to do so is with my vote.
No, we know.
The last 10 or so petitions I tried to sign resulted in an error that I needed to log in, despite the corner of the page welcoming me by name.
I wish this hadn't been modded -1 Troll. A troll "is a prank comment intended to provoke indignant (or just confused) responses" (source).
Whenever the topic of drug legalization comes up - no matter the venue - this argument crops up. Just because it doesn't hold water to those of us on the "tax and legalize" side doesn't make it a troll, it just makes it an argument for the other side.
tl;dr I don't agree with parent either, but that doesn't make his/her post a troll.