It's not always that straightforward to take the drive out of an external and use it. Some of those drives are built with electronics that no longer has SATA - the drive itself comes out directly to USB. Also you void the warranty by taking it part.
Categorically wrong. No rigid airship built by the Zeppelin company after WW1 suffered any major mishap due to weather, and hardly any of almost 100 flown during WW1 did. The dilettante (UK and US) constructor/operators never developed enough expertise and experience to completely achieve safety in respect to weather like the Germans did. They certainly would have done so if they had more than barely wet their feet in the technology.
It is utter bullshit that the Zeppelins were "fair weather flyers". Graf Zeppelin (one million miles in nine years) and Hindenburg flew through quite strong weather, including frontal systems and squalls. Often passengers would look down on a violently churning, mountainous sea with huge ships bobbing like corks, while they themselves were walking around or dining, their own wine glasses absolutely undisturbed on the table. Once Hindenburg hooked onto a hurricane to boost her speed by the better part of 100 mph. The structure was not unduly stressed thereby, and the passengers remained in complete comfort.
Actually what you said applies to a rigid airship specifically. A dirigible is simply a lighter than air craft which can move independent of the wind and directly control its flight path (contrasted to a balloon). I.e., a synonym for "airship". Dirigible simply means "capable of being steered". A blimp is just as much of a dirigible as a rigid airship is. I realize popular usage of the word has become completely bogus.
Correct. The issue that those of us who have familiarity in the field have with Aeros is how their design could possibly handle rapidly changing, gusty winds on landing and takeoff. Not necessarily violent winds. Very moderate winds which are changeable.
I also flew in a blimp and talked to the pilot and other personnel; also studied the theory and technology at length. If you are talking about a blimp or a Zeppelin NT, you couldn't possibly be more wrong about decreasing or increasing buoyancy by using the ballonets (what you call "bladders"). That's not what they do at all. They have zero effect on overall static lift; none; nada. They are for fore-aft trim, as you say, but primarily they are to keep the pressure in the envelope constant as the helium expands and contracts due to altitude and temperature changes.
The static lift is controlled using the sandbags you mention. And only the sandbags.
... they can still walk through the door with a warrant...
"With a warrant", BWAHAHAHA! What fantasy makes you think they need a warrant for anything? They walk up to the door; if it doesn't open they bust it in; then they TELL you that you have a choice. Either hand over all the data NOW and never breathe a word to anybody that they were ever there, or you will go to the Gulag right now and nobody will ever find you again.
It isn't precisely the phrasing I would use. Every shred of public confidence was lost on 2011-3-11 and the few days following, and nothing done since has restored a single iota of it.
Well I have to say I love it when a womans got a southern drawl, mind you I am English so for me there is no social stigma to that accent as its exotic.
Ever since Doc Hollywood, whenever I hear a woman's southern drawl on the phone I see JulieWarner
I gave you a chance to fix your own confusion between Iraq and Iran but you didn't take the opportunity. Operation Opera was Israel bombing Iraq, not Iran. I suggest you google "israel bombs iran" yourself. I very much doubt you will find that it has ever happened. Hint: Iran was never antagonistic to Israel until the religious nutjobs took over approximately 34 years ago.
England wants nothing to do with us on it as well as most of Europe.
Huh? England *very* much wants this as does all of NATO. Oh, are you talking about English citizens? They don't matter in this decision.
But maybe Parliament does matter, eh? And what other NATO nation has expressed official gung-ho endorsement of the US regime in this matter, let alone military involvment? Perhaps by "all of NATO" you mean "France". I am not up to date on France's position of the hour. I do know Hollande shot his mouth off some days ago, but the French population is not crazy about his enthusiasm for unprovoked military action against a sovereign power not belligerent to France.
I suspect, having watched both the US and British loose cannons in chief come up so far short of support, Hollande may well waver.
Perhaps you would cite the specifics on these acts of war? I have never heard this remarkable allegation before. The rest of your points are very well taken indeed.
So supposedly the US and British found evidence that Syria had used sarin, but refused to divulge the details.
Well, that bit would make sense. If you divulge too many details, you leave clues as to how to came by your information which puts your spies and methods at risk.
Oh come now. The US regime needs to either PUT UP or SHUT THE FUCK UP. Sure, it may have a compelling national defense interest not to reveal its sources and the details of its discovery, but then its claim remains ALLEGED and its justification for committing acts of war against a sovereign power not belligerent to the US remains VOID.
Who is going to invent something new, if someone else can right away copy the exact idea, possibly even cheaper (since they get the end result of the idea without the time/money spent in developing the idea), thus preventing the inventor from making a living from their new idea?
That is the tired old argument of the pro-patentists (their ONLY substantive argument). In order to believe the argument is valid, one would have to explain away the invention of the wheel, the saddle for riding horses, and other assorted innovations which predate any patenting system. And one would have to wave away the inconvenient fact of all the innovations that nobody bothers to patent even though patent protection rackets are practically universal in the sense that most of the population of the world lives in some country which has a patent system.
The notion that no one would ever bother to innovate unless they could personally make a handsome profit by extorting payment, not in exchange for any product or service, from others who use the patented technique is unrealistic and, forgive me, perverse. I can't prove there would be zero effect on innovation if the patent system were abolished, and neither can the pro-patentists prove that there WOULD be a significant effect. Human nature leans in my direction, since people do many things which do not have pure profit motive at their root.
Finally, even if the patent system were to be definitely established to be effective at its intended purpose, it would still be morally evil on its face. Mr. Smith makes an innovation and patents it. Mr. Doe reads the patent and tries to use the innovation without authorization, and is prevented from doing so. That could be regarded as moral. But Mr. Jones INDEPENDENTLY arrives at the same innovation without ever having heard of Mr. Smith's work or patent, and also tries to use the product of HIS OWN INTELLECT without saying mother-may-I and getting authorization (for consideration, doubtless) from Mr. Smith. Jones is ALSO prevented from doing so. That is immoral on its face, and a denial of natural rights.
Breakage? BREAKAGE? Snort. Have you ever tried to break a DVD? I have. It wouldn't play and I got mad at it, OK? I gripped it with two pairs of heavy duty pliers and twisted and tortured it. I bent it 90 degrees and it didn't break. It may have been ruined by me applying force comparable to driving a car over it with rocks underneath, but it didn't break. I finally succeeded and came within a hair's breadth of killing myself with razor sharp fragments. It took almost superhuman force. I could only manage it by pure rage.
Granted, it's a moot point. It's pretty damn easy to scratch the damn things so that they are ruined. But a larger envelope doesn't do crap to prevent that. If the P.O. can gouge through paper, it can just as well gouge through sturdier cardboard - and it often does.
The point is taken, but the question was "what right do they have to demand a business plan". OK, basically they say you better not break any laws, add some activities that are not illegal but they don't let you do them anyway - none of them pertaining specifically to the scheme under discussion. It's possible they could use the excuse that they think MailPile is just a fraud or pyramid scheme, but if so, according to ordinary business ethics they should have to give evidence of that suspicion (don't laugh:-)
This smells more to me like they got leaned on by the NSA because they abhor the concept of privacy.
Thank you for the information. If Tesla is really behind the continuing innovation with 18650s at Panasonic, then it certainly doesn't do anything but raise my already high estimation for Tesla and Musk. I had inferred, perhaps unwarrantedly, that Panasonic's research in this area was internally driven. In any case, Panasonic + Tesla is certainly a great partnership.
Worse than this, I have friends that tell me, "Oh no PayPal is fine, just only use it for sending money, not receiving."
No, just no. By supporting them you are helping perpetuate the scam that is PayPal. How do you think they make money? By getting people to use their service.
Stop supporting people that make PayPal possible, and they will disappear.
Sorry (sincerely). The day some entity emerges, proves itself as safe, reliable, convenient, and universal to me as a buyer - minus PayPal's negatives - that's the day I might stop supporting PayPal with my custom. I very much doubt I will live long enough to see that day, however.
Slashdot Mirror
I assume they are for 13 year old girls.
The sooner the better.
It's not always that straightforward to take the drive out of an external and use it. Some of those drives are built with electronics that no longer has SATA - the drive itself comes out directly to USB. Also you void the warranty by taking it part.
Categorically wrong. No rigid airship built by the Zeppelin company after WW1 suffered any major mishap due to weather, and hardly any of almost 100 flown during WW1 did. The dilettante (UK and US) constructor/operators never developed enough expertise and experience to completely achieve safety in respect to weather like the Germans did. They certainly would have done so if they had more than barely wet their feet in the technology.
It is utter bullshit that the Zeppelins were "fair weather flyers". Graf Zeppelin (one million miles in nine years) and Hindenburg flew through quite strong weather, including frontal systems and squalls. Often passengers would look down on a violently churning, mountainous sea with huge ships bobbing like corks, while they themselves were walking around or dining, their own wine glasses absolutely undisturbed on the table. Once Hindenburg hooked onto a hurricane to boost her speed by the better part of 100 mph. The structure was not unduly stressed thereby, and the passengers remained in complete comfort.
Actually what you said applies to a rigid airship specifically. A dirigible is simply a lighter than air craft which can move independent of the wind and directly control its flight path (contrasted to a balloon). I.e., a synonym for "airship". Dirigible simply means "capable of being steered". A blimp is just as much of a dirigible as a rigid airship is. I realize popular usage of the word has become completely bogus.
Correct. The issue that those of us who have familiarity in the field have with Aeros is how their design could possibly handle rapidly changing, gusty winds on landing and takeoff. Not necessarily violent winds. Very moderate winds which are changeable.
I also flew in a blimp and talked to the pilot and other personnel; also studied the theory and technology at length. If you are talking about a blimp or a Zeppelin NT, you couldn't possibly be more wrong about decreasing or increasing buoyancy by using the ballonets (what you call "bladders"). That's not what they do at all. They have zero effect on overall static lift; none; nada. They are for fore-aft trim, as you say, but primarily they are to keep the pressure in the envelope constant as the helium expands and contracts due to altitude and temperature changes.
The static lift is controlled using the sandbags you mention. And only the sandbags.
"With a warrant", BWAHAHAHA! What fantasy makes you think they need a warrant for anything? They walk up to the door; if it doesn't open they bust it in; then they TELL you that you have a choice. Either hand over all the data NOW and never breathe a word to anybody that they were ever there, or you will go to the Gulag right now and nobody will ever find you again.
Duh. Ya think, TEPCO shitheads?
It isn't precisely the phrasing I would use. Every shred of public confidence was lost on 2011-3-11 and the few days following, and nothing done since has restored a single iota of it.
UK the censors. We who are about to censor salute you. /s
Not really.
Ever since Doc Hollywood, whenever I hear a woman's southern drawl on the phone I see Julie Warner
Can you run air traffic control effectively with it? Sounds like it might be a bit like trying to use Navajo. I don't claim you couldn't; just asking.
I gave you a chance to fix your own confusion between Iraq and Iran but you didn't take the opportunity. Operation Opera was Israel bombing Iraq, not Iran. I suggest you google "israel bombs iran" yourself. I very much doubt you will find that it has ever happened. Hint: Iran was never antagonistic to Israel until the religious nutjobs took over approximately 34 years ago.
But maybe Parliament does matter, eh? And what other NATO nation has expressed official gung-ho endorsement of the US regime in this matter, let alone military involvment? Perhaps by "all of NATO" you mean "France". I am not up to date on France's position of the hour. I do know Hollande shot his mouth off some days ago, but the French population is not crazy about his enthusiasm for unprovoked military action against a sovereign power not belligerent to France.
I suspect, having watched both the US and British loose cannons in chief come up so far short of support, Hollande may well waver.
In other words, "We know stuff you don't, and we're not going to deign to produce any documented proof."
Sorry, Bob Menendez. You may be 100% correct, but you haven't provided a very persuasive casus belli.
I very much believe you are confused about the distinction between Al Qaeda and the Taliban regime.
Perhaps you would cite the specifics on these acts of war? I have never heard this remarkable allegation before. The rest of your points are very well taken indeed.
Oh come now. The US regime needs to either PUT UP or SHUT THE FUCK UP. Sure, it may have a compelling national defense interest not to reveal its sources and the details of its discovery, but then its claim remains ALLEGED and its justification for committing acts of war against a sovereign power not belligerent to the US remains VOID.
Perhaps you could be so kind as to explain why you believe this.
That is the tired old argument of the pro-patentists (their ONLY substantive argument). In order to believe the argument is valid, one would have to explain away the invention of the wheel, the saddle for riding horses, and other assorted innovations which predate any patenting system. And one would have to wave away the inconvenient fact of all the innovations that nobody bothers to patent even though patent protection rackets are practically universal in the sense that most of the population of the world lives in some country which has a patent system.
The notion that no one would ever bother to innovate unless they could personally make a handsome profit by extorting payment, not in exchange for any product or service, from others who use the patented technique is unrealistic and, forgive me, perverse. I can't prove there would be zero effect on innovation if the patent system were abolished, and neither can the pro-patentists prove that there WOULD be a significant effect. Human nature leans in my direction, since people do many things which do not have pure profit motive at their root.
Finally, even if the patent system were to be definitely established to be effective at its intended purpose, it would still be morally evil on its face. Mr. Smith makes an innovation and patents it. Mr. Doe reads the patent and tries to use the innovation without authorization, and is prevented from doing so. That could be regarded as moral. But Mr. Jones INDEPENDENTLY arrives at the same innovation without ever having heard of Mr. Smith's work or patent, and also tries to use the product of HIS OWN INTELLECT without saying mother-may-I and getting authorization (for consideration, doubtless) from Mr. Smith. Jones is ALSO prevented from doing so. That is immoral on its face, and a denial of natural rights.
Breakage? BREAKAGE? Snort. Have you ever tried to break a DVD? I have. It wouldn't play and I got mad at it, OK? I gripped it with two pairs of heavy duty pliers and twisted and tortured it. I bent it 90 degrees and it didn't break. It may have been ruined by me applying force comparable to driving a car over it with rocks underneath, but it didn't break. I finally succeeded and came within a hair's breadth of killing myself with razor sharp fragments. It took almost superhuman force. I could only manage it by pure rage.
Granted, it's a moot point. It's pretty damn easy to scratch the damn things so that they are ruined. But a larger envelope doesn't do crap to prevent that. If the P.O. can gouge through paper, it can just as well gouge through sturdier cardboard - and it often does.
The point is taken, but the question was "what right do they have to demand a business plan". OK, basically they say you better not break any laws, add some activities that are not illegal but they don't let you do them anyway - none of them pertaining specifically to the scheme under discussion. It's possible they could use the excuse that they think MailPile is just a fraud or pyramid scheme, but if so, according to ordinary business ethics they should have to give evidence of that suspicion (don't laugh :-)
This smells more to me like they got leaned on by the NSA because they abhor the concept of privacy.
Thank you for the information. If Tesla is really behind the continuing innovation with 18650s at Panasonic, then it certainly doesn't do anything but raise my already high estimation for Tesla and Musk. I had inferred, perhaps unwarrantedly, that Panasonic's research in this area was internally driven. In any case, Panasonic + Tesla is certainly a great partnership.
Sorry (sincerely). The day some entity emerges, proves itself as safe, reliable, convenient, and universal to me as a buyer - minus PayPal's negatives - that's the day I might stop supporting PayPal with my custom. I very much doubt I will live long enough to see that day, however.