I don't know why the US converts Titan missiles for satellite purposes, but it clearly isn't because of any serious attempt to reduce US military dominance.
Because they didn't have another good option for the payloads they wanted to launch. The USA bet the farm on Shuttle. Now they have the EELVs like Delta IV and Atlas V, but there are still some Titans in the stockpile to use.
Atlas V has AFAIK nothing in common with the original Atlas ICBM. The solids are brand new, the liquid engines were developed for space launch vehicles.
Delta IV was wholly designed as a space launcher.
Same thing about Ariane 4 or 5.
Regarding, the others, you are correct. The thing is, nuclear missiles are just not that big anymore. The warheads used are much smaller, liquid fuels have gotten out of use. The exception is for nascent nuclear powers like India.
It is a crime (often punishable by death) to speak against the state in some countries. Does it make the law moral? Was what China made at Tiananmen Square moral?
It is not stealing, it is copying. If I like your house, and I build one like it, am I stealing your house? The problem here is that many people have lost their way and no longer know what is moral and what is not.
Well, actually, they do have one moral: the one with the biggest stick wins.
The code is dumb, yes, but you are wrong, nonetheless. That code won't even compile. I think you meant itoa(), which would be about the same as sprintf in terms of functionality.
Heh, now I found out someone had already noticed that about hash. You are not crazy, it is just that the person who wrote that code doesn't seem to know how to program in C++.
I just looked at hash (C++, Java), but it seems he uses C++ STL and the Java API. This may end up being more of an API than a language test...
It also does stupid things. Like this:
int c = 0; for (int i=n; i>0; i--) { sprintf(buf, "%d", i); if (X[strdup(buf)]) c++; }
When this would have worked just fine:
int c = 0; for (int i=n; i>0; i--) { if (X[atoi(i)]) c++; }
The alternative is actually shorter, besides being faster and using less RAM.
I think the person which wrote this didn't know how to program in C++ very well. The two pieces of code are not even equivalent. The second loop is traversed backwards in the C++ version while it is not in the Java version. Don't ask me why.
Oh and to the people who shrugh the lies and damned lies in these Microsoft ads as so blatantly false that anyone will see them as what they are, remember, if you repeat a lie long enough, people start believing it. We cannot leave such lies uncontested.
I dunno about you, but when I go to a Linux news site like LinuxToday, I expect to see Linux product ads. Not Microsoft Windows ads. This sort of thing should simply be erradicated, nothing more.
On Slashdot it is ok, since this is actually a generic news site.
Of course, the owner defines the criteria. So the best thing I can do is voice my concern and simply *not* to go to the website.
AFAIK most (all?) plants get carbon from CO2 in the air and hydrogen from water. Then they transform these materials via photosynthesis into sugars. Nitrogen however is different. Only some plants can get nitrogen from the air, others must get it from the soil. Some biotech companies develop hybrids which can capture their own nitrogen for plants without this native capability, but that is a different kettle of fish.:-)
Nitrogen is usually provided with ammonia based fertilizers today, while in the old days dung and saltpeter were used. Plants have other needs as well, phosphorous, potassium, etc. The needs vary with the type of plant grown. This is one reason why crop rotation is used, as different plants consume different things, this allows the soil to replenish nutrients for plant A while plant B, which uses different nutrients, is growing. This enables increased production.
Yes, the way of launching it is pretty nifty. The rocket is brought assembled horizontally, then the launch platform puts it in upright position and loads the fuel. This is all done in a reasonable time, since this was supposed to be an ICBM.
Tell that to the Russian Navy. They just had a misfire of one of their Cold War era manufactured ICBMs a couple of weeks ago. Dnepr, also known as the SS-18 Satan ICBM, was signed out of use by Reagan and Gorbachev. These launchers are old refurbished ICBMs people.
A) Wind velocity depends on a lot of things, including air temperature. It is not constant. See this. Sorry that I couldn't find a link of an actual grid power station, but these numbers are hard to find.
B) Electric cars can be technically done, the problem is cost. The batteries alone are very expensive. More expensive than the rest of the car actually. They must also be replaced every couple of years. Hence why there is all this talk about fuel cells. No batteries. GM stopped EV1 because it was anti-economical. If they thought they would get a profit from it, you can bet they would have produced it. All they want is money.
C) Regarding birds... See this this, this and this.
If we listened to some Greens every time they talk, we would be having global famine, war and poverty by now.
Conspiracy theory time! I wonder what the throw weight is, say, halfway around the globe?
About three to four tons. But that was just a joke. It could be used as an ICBM though.
In case you didn't know about it, some people who work on P230 and P80 also help develop the French M51 SLBMs and manufacture explosives for car airbags. So yeah, solid rocket technology can be used for a log of things. Fear the intercontinental airbags!
This project is mostly lead by the Italians. I think the French do not see much use for such a small launcher, but the fact is ESA is using old Russian ICBMs for several small missions today (university projects, etc) precisely because there is no small launcher.
Oh and dumping Ariane 4, losing their midsized launcher, was a stupid, stupid idea... Now they are replacing it with Soyuz. Oh well, at least Soyuz has the benefit of being man-rated. So they can launch some Soyuz and Progress ships from Kourou to ISS.
The large solids are filled at a facility near the launch site. They don't come fueled all the way from Europe.
But yes, I agree. Solids are not very good for anything but military launches where rapid response time is paramount. Hybrids like Rutan's SpaceShipOne is using are better, but the technology is not as well developed. One last note: these solids are being made by the same people who do the P230 solids of Ariane 5. P230 has never failed on an Ariane launch.
They intend to use some Vega P80 technology for a future evolution of the Ariane 5 P230 solid rocket boosters. They are both manufactured by the same people AFAIK. The technologies to be re-used include cheaper filament-wound casing and a new nozzle.
Slashdot Mirror
Because they didn't have another good option for the payloads they wanted to launch. The USA bet the farm on Shuttle. Now they have the EELVs like Delta IV and Atlas V, but there are still some Titans in the stockpile to use.
Delta IV was wholly designed as a space launcher.
Same thing about Ariane 4 or 5.
Regarding, the others, you are correct. The thing is, nuclear missiles are just not that big anymore. The warheads used are much smaller, liquid fuels have gotten out of use. The exception is for nascent nuclear powers like India.
Warcraft II works just fine in DOSBox. At least it did last time I tried it.
It is not stealing, it is copying. If I like your house, and I build one like it, am I stealing your house? The problem here is that many people have lost their way and no longer know what is moral and what is not.
Well, actually, they do have one moral: the one with the biggest stick wins.
Regarding light rad shielding, have you noticed this?
I even knew about Bigelow Aerospace, but it didn't even cross my mind.
The first strdup() for the hash creation is necessary. The second strdup() for the hash lookup is utterly useless and a memory leak.
Hey, this is Slashdot and I'm presently booted in Uncle Bill's hell OS. ;-)
The point was strdup() (which does a malloc() followed by a memcpy()) is not necessary in that function call.
Heh. I really need to get some sleep.
Heh, now I found out someone had already noticed that about hash. You are not crazy, it is just that the person who wrote that code doesn't seem to know how to program in C++.
It also does stupid things. Like this:
When this would have worked just fine:The alternative is actually shorter, besides being faster and using less RAM.
I think the person which wrote this didn't know how to program in C++ very well. The two pieces of code are not even equivalent. The second loop is traversed backwards in the C++ version while it is not in the Java version. Don't ask me why.
I told you if you repeat a lie long enough people started believing it. :)
Oh and to the people who shrugh the lies and damned lies in these Microsoft ads as so blatantly false that anyone will see them as what they are, remember, if you repeat a lie long enough, people start believing it. We cannot leave such lies uncontested.
On Slashdot it is ok, since this is actually a generic news site.
Of course, the owner defines the criteria. So the best thing I can do is voice my concern and simply *not* to go to the website.
Nitrogen is usually provided with ammonia based fertilizers today, while in the old days dung and saltpeter were used. Plants have other needs as well, phosphorous, potassium, etc. The needs vary with the type of plant grown. This is one reason why crop rotation is used, as different plants consume different things, this allows the soil to replenish nutrients for plant A while plant B, which uses different nutrients, is growing. This enables increased production.
Yes, the way of launching it is pretty nifty. The rocket is brought assembled horizontally, then the launch platform puts it in upright position and loads the fuel. This is all done in a reasonable time, since this was supposed to be an ICBM.
Tell that to the Russian Navy. They just had a misfire of one of their Cold War era manufactured ICBMs a couple of weeks ago. Dnepr, also known as the SS-18 Satan ICBM, was signed out of use by Reagan and Gorbachev. These launchers are old refurbished ICBMs people.
B) Electric cars can be technically done, the problem is cost. The batteries alone are very expensive. More expensive than the rest of the car actually. They must also be replaced every couple of years. Hence why there is all this talk about fuel cells. No batteries. GM stopped EV1 because it was anti-economical. If they thought they would get a profit from it, you can bet they would have produced it. All they want is money.
C) Regarding birds... See this this, this and this.
If we listened to some Greens every time they talk, we would be having global famine, war and poverty by now.
Here is a link to the people behind the solid rocket fuel and the before mentioned airbag explosives. Boom!
About three to four tons. But that was just a joke. It could be used as an ICBM though.
In case you didn't know about it, some people who work on P230 and P80 also help develop the French M51 SLBMs and manufacture explosives for car airbags. So yeah, solid rocket technology can be used for a log of things. Fear the intercontinental airbags!
Oh and dumping Ariane 4, losing their midsized launcher, was a stupid, stupid idea... Now they are replacing it with Soyuz. Oh well, at least Soyuz has the benefit of being man-rated. So they can launch some Soyuz and Progress ships from Kourou to ISS.
But yes, I agree. Solids are not very good for anything but military launches where rapid response time is paramount. Hybrids like Rutan's SpaceShipOne is using are better, but the technology is not as well developed. One last note: these solids are being made by the same people who do the P230 solids of Ariane 5. P230 has never failed on an Ariane launch.
They intend to use some Vega P80 technology for a future evolution of the Ariane 5 P230 solid rocket boosters. They are both manufactured by the same people AFAIK. The technologies to be re-used include cheaper filament-wound casing and a new nozzle.
Yes. Usually Rokot or Dnepr launches (old refurbished Russian ICBMs) are bought for small and cheap payloads, but they aren't exactly reliable...