A recent Childline poll found nearly 10% of 12-13-year-olds were worried they were addicted to pornography
Because you told them that because they looked at one image in a magazine that they were addicted. You set them up to answer that way, likely by saying 'Are you addicted to porn' while shaking your head yes at them suggestively.
A 12-13 year old has no fucking clue what addiction is, even if they were. I'm fairly certain based on its usage here that no one involved in the study or conversation about the study knows what addiction actually is to.
Infatuation is not addiction morons.
18% had seen shocking or upsetting images.
Actually its 100%, but the other 82% were smart enough not to mention the shit they've seen mommy and daddy do. The real world sucks, if they can't cope with 'upsetting images' then porn is the least of your concern and hiding the kid in a card board box for the rest of his/her life so they don't have to survive on their own might be your best bet.
As a result of our work with industry, more than 90% of UK consumers are offered the choice to easily configure their internet service through family-friendly filters
And 0% Use it because the parents aren't the ones that are freaked out about their kids looking at porn.
How sad is your world view when you think see two people do something entirely natural and REQUIRED FOR THE SURVIVAL OF OUR SPECIES and it offends you. And then to top it off, you have to freak out and project your personal issues with seeing boobies on to 12-13 year olds and convince them they are 'addicted' to something. 12-14 year olds are addicted to EVERYTHING THATS TABOO. If you told them it was dirty and sexual to brush their teeth 4 times a day, England would suddenly have the worlds healthiest teeth in the 12-13 year old group.
This kind of ignorance is spewed from some jack ass who doesn't have a kid (or isn't actually a parent to the kid) and doesn't realize that it will actually make MORE kids look at MORE porn.
How the fuck do people get old and totally forget what being a kid was like. It blows me away.
leaves pure Zirconium. Which is typically used as cladding for nuclear fuel rods. Something that a fair portion of the world would freak out about, because anything that's good for nuclear must be bad. Plus there's this gem: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Well, they should get to the freaking out part because Zirconium isn't exactly uncommon or difficult to produce. Its a by product of all sorts of mining processes and fairly common within the Earths crust.
And if you want to throw prices out there, $900/ton for Zirconium makes it cheaper than stainless, so if anyone was going to freak out about it... they would have.
and is able to compile a mach kernal and the whole OS using the same language.
Yea, Swift is as capable of doing this are Perl or Python is. Just because you can write a one liner that is essentially function_call_to_a_million_lines_of_C_code() doesn't mean you can do anything in the language. Apple certainly hasn't ported the kernel or any substantial parts of the OS to Swift and they aren't going to.
Swift is for people who don't know how to code, not for people who do. People who do know how to code still use C.
No, it says more about the bad benchmark than anything else.
I'm not impressed that ARM can NOP as fast as an i3 to put it bluntly.
I say this because if you look at the bench marks and the way they did it. They compile arm variants in fully optimized mode, and x86 variants generic x86 code. From that point on, reading is a waste of time. Might as well compile with debugging on from a bench mark perspective.
Baro measurements are accurate to about 5' at these altitudes
Not in an airplane. Only when calibrated and stationary and there is no change to air pressure occurring. So basically no where outside of a completely controlled/sealed lab.
In the real world a gust of wind can give you enough of a pressure differential (not from the wind itself, just the actual static pressure change) to sway your measurement hundreds of feet. They are also sensitive to light and heat, and you can easily sway 20-30 feet from just moving the drone from a sunny area to a shaded area.
A laser altimeter doesn't suffer from those problems, granted, but putting those on drones means installing a device thats large and costs more than the drone itself in most cases.
Because rockets were actually working at that point, maybe not refined, but still useful. Quantum computer is not useful in any way at this time.
Quantum computing is still at the mumbo jumbo stage where they make really bold claims about what it can do in 1 or 2 really specific instances that all of 8 people on the planet care about, but then never follow through with a quantum machine that out performs a classical one in any way.
Oh, and the answer(s) may not even be right and has to be checked using classical methods anyway.
Show me one that doesn't require a special FAB to produce the actual chip, at which point you can't control whats actually going on in the chip itself.
There are NO open source CPUs, only open source designs.
It stops being open source when it needs to run on a proprietary FPGA.
Why would I give slashdot access to my Google account info? See I created separate accounts instead of bitching that people could figure out that I was a douche across all my sites using the same account.
And lets point out, I'm using an account thats 15 years old, you aren't even logged in.
I've had at least 3 Google accounts since before G+ existed and added another 2 while G+ existed. Its pretty simple to create a new account with or without a real name, which hasn't been a requirement for a while now, thanks for paying attention to what you're whining about...
Every computer has an OS, its just a question of how complex it is.
XP Embedded is not XP desktop anymore than Android is Debian. They aren't running a desktop OS any more than your cell phone is.
XP Embedded is not unsupported, and you're an idiot since you seem to think you have some non-buggy OS. The fact that you make such a comment tells me you know so little about software dev that you have no business even commenting in this conversation. All software has bugs.
The OS wasn't compromised, and XP embedded is pretty secure... it doesn't run anything out of the box, so its pretty safe.
You choose Windows because the Win32 API has a couple of metric fucktons of developers available that are JUST as capable as random Linux developer that thinks he's kind shit just because he runs Linux even though his software is just as exploitable on Linux as it is on XP.
How ignorant do you have to be to make such retarded statements? Pretty fucking ignorant I'd say.
No, you have no reason why XP is wrong for the job, you're just parroting what you've heard others say without understanding why.
In an embedded environment with limited attack vectors, XP is fine.
Note: They aren't even attacking XP here, they are attacking the software Brink's themselves wrote. Might be a good idea to get a clue before blaming the wrong thing fanboy.
I don't want to have the same profile across all my google products but I want to login with the same profile across all the products
Which, to put it bluntly, is fucking retarded.
If you want different profiles, create different accounts. Your identity is your identity, its pretty stupid to use the same account across all the platforms but different names, the only person you're fooling is yourself, for everyone else we can still easily link your various google accounts to the same login, but hey, you go ahead and pretend because you can now use a different alias on youtube that no one can figure out who you are when you go trolling.
So big fucking woop, you don't have to give google the 3 lines it requires for a Google+ profile in one place... now you're going to do it in EVERY place.
If you're one of the people who think this is good, you really are stupid and need to put your tin foil hat away. Its not even hiding you from anything.
Yes, this post is inflammatory, its supposed to be, its targeted at the trolls who think hiding behind their half assed pseudonym is clever even when logging in with the same email address/account everywhere.
real desire. It's totally possible to have a proprietary license with source provided to the customer.
That's still open source. Contrary to what Stallman and the libretards have tried to do and usurp the wording, open source doesn't mean giving it away for free. It means the source is available, maybe even at an additional cost.
It's only GPL fanboys that think OSS implies free. OSS software predates Stallman and FSF, GNU and GPL, he didn't come up with the idea... He just tried to usurp it and twist it to his own narrow definition based on his viral agenda.
I fly drones (real ones, not this crap that DJI sells, those are just Quads with some halfassed flight controllers).
I think this is GREAT. This is simply common sense. Someone else's property is not yours to do with as you wish, that includes public lands.
Quads ARE DANGEROUS when they are large enough to carry a camera. A drop from even 10 feet above your head with a 5 pound object is MORE than enough to be RELIABLY LEATHAL.
like the trunk which opens automatically when you put your foot under the car and you are nearby. This is just a big gift for thieves, just wait for tourists with a car full of stuff to leave their car, stand in the vicinity and put your foot under the car when they leave but they are still near enough to allow the trunk to open...
Awe, isn't that cute, you're talking about shit you know nothing about.
In order for that trunk to open, your key has to be within about 1/3rd of a meter from the trunk lock or it doesn't open, so if I'm close enough that you can get into the trunk that way, I'm also close enough to just beat your ass for trying, since you two are going to be well within my striking distance at that point. You'd be hard pressed to get your foot under there with me close enough because I'm going to be in between you and the sensor or the sensor is going to ignore you.
And by the way, that sensor... its a kick button, not just an IR pickup or something.
Same for the doors, you have to be within about a foot of the door. You can't unlock the doors from the outside when the key is on the inside. You can't unlock or open any of the doors with the key at or more than a meter away from the door you're trying to unlock.
You're missing the point here. They know how to deal with keys reasonable well, this is not new. In fact anything that requires physical presence they are generally pretty good with these days. There isn't a lot new here even if you think keyless entry is, it isn't.
They don't know shit about dealing with radio connected cars that can be touched by people anywhere on the planet. THATS why this DAB thing is a possibility, previously the only people who could 'hack' the car, were physically in contact with the car, which is an easy problem to deal, Smith & Wesson sells a product for this. What they can't deal with is when some random person somewhere far away that you can't see or detect until your left front wheel locks up because someone remotely commanded the ABS/TCS system to lock the wheel. No one in the car would do that because it's dangerous to them. The dude sitting in his chair miles away? He'll do it because he's an arrogant prick that thinks he's special cause he downloaded some hax0r app where someone else did all the work and doesn't realize that being a script kiddie just makes him a douche, not powerful and impressive.
... Participating in the music (i.e. singing along or head banging) is more than just listening. Which is where you fail to understand my statement.
Simply listening to music in the background while doing another task nearly universally makes people more productive and more focused than without.
Bottom line, anything that distacts you from the task at hand, impairs your ability, contrary to what you may think.
No shit Sherlock, you figure that one out all by yourself? I'm fairly certain that we all know that before any of these studies even started, after all... THATS THE MEANING OF DISTRACTION.
The point is that music itself is NOT distracting and is in fact helpful. Finding another excuse/distraction to not get the job done is the human's fault, not the music, but hey I'm guessing you're one of those guys that likes to have an excuse for everything, right?
Music is something that prevents you from being distracted by other noises, and because you aren't really paying attention to it so it's not a distraction.
you have to remember GPUs have abysmal memory bandwidth (due to being limited by PCIe's 16GB/s to the CPU)
Uhm, no. GPUs have massive bandwidth to THEIR memory. You're talking about lower speeds to memory of A DIFFERENT PROCESSOR, so essentially you're trying to compare using the PCI bus as a network and your direct memory access. These are two different things. GPUs can have far more memory than the systems they are attached to and nVidia has certainly used this as a selling point for their GPGPU stuff. If your GPU is using system memory over the PCI bus, you fucked up your hardware purchase. When you think of the PCI bus as a network bus, which is what its used for in the instance you're referring to, then its about as fast as you can find within several orders of magnitude of cost. The problem with GPUs is branching, not memory.
3.Programming is the biggest difficulty, and will make or break our company and processor. The DARPA grant is specifically for continued research and work on our development tools, which are intended to automate the unique features of our memory system. We have some papers in the works and will be talking pubicly about our *very* cool software in the next couple of months.
You've never heard of Itanium, have you? Unless you can change this so that your model fits the existing developer base, you're screwed. Seriously, go read up on Itanium, trust me, you'll realize that your best bet is to figure out how to blow as much of the money as you can on vacations and fun things before it disappears.
and stack machines are notorious for having HORRIBLE support for languages like C.
So basically everything anyone that matters understands about software dev... won't work on your machine. Well thats handy, at least you'll have an excuse as to why no one can make useful software for your system.
have been around for over 10 years and have given nothing but talks with powerpoints (though they clearly are very intelligent and have an interesting architectures) says a lot about their future viability. I hate to be a downer like that
Thats okay, you're just too young and inexperienced to realize you'll be lucky if you last that long.
All commercially built helicopters are designed for large bird strikes, a Phantom impacting the rotor or tail rotor is unlikely to cause very much damage. You're imagining a full on direct impact with the main mass of the phantom, which would never happen, its just going to hit one or two of the arms the motors are attached to and that impact will send the rest of the phantom away from the rotor at significant speed and certainly leave the phantom in no flyable shape so its not going to happen again.
LiPo batteries that you're talking about, are far from dense, thats why they are used in aircraft, low mass == low weight == better flight performance
Its unlikely to cause very much damage to the tail rotor actually, a dent or something, maybe some vibration, but nothing thats going to down the aircraft. Tail rotors aren't made out of Balsa and a Phantom is pretty small.
And further more, 'major'' damage to the tail rotor isn't going to be something the pilot can deal with. The tail rotor either works well enough to fly and the pilot won't really notice, or it fails to the point where it doesn't counter act the torque of the main rotors, in which cause the pilot's skill level doesn't matter, the aircraft can not be 'flown' in any sense of the word. In order to not spin around in circles till he passes out, then dies, he's going to auto rotate the craft immediately, which means a very hard landing in an almost certainly unplanned place. While this is a maneuver that heli pilots are required to train for... its also one that doesn't actually go well when you do it in a real situation. People tend to get hurt very badly or die in an auto rotation.
the helicopter then goes into autorotation if you are lucky
This isn't optional, its the way they work, autorotation happens without any intervention from the pilot at any point when the turbine is producing less power than the energy stored in the rotors. If this did not happen, powering down the turbine would cause the aircraft to spin out of control in circles due to the torque differences. This happens in normal operations, it is in fact required just to turn the damn thing off on the ground.
landing in the fire you are trying to put out.
You don't drop flame retardant materials in the middle of the fire, you drop them on the edges or small sections, making it trivial to 'not land in the fire', though your alternative landing sites are probably effectively dangerous due to terrain... otherwise you'd use a fire truck.
What if the drone smashes into your windshield in limited visibility, knocking the pilot out cold or worse.
The wind shields of modern aircraft are designed for heavy high speed impacts, unless you fly into a predator drone, this is unlikely to be a problem. A helicopter simply doesn't fly fast enough (and can't due to the laws of physics) to make this a serious issue.
You are very wrong here. Look at the airplane that landed in the Hudson River that was taken out by a goose. Seriously, a goose, a lot of drones are of similar weight or larger, also a lot softer.
It was taken out by multiple, in multiple engines. It flew into a flock of them. Not one, not two, but more than 4 at a minimum judging by insturmentation.
If bird strikes are a hazard, how would a drone NOT be a hazard?
They are a hazard and should be removed from the picture in emergency situations in whatever way the first responders see fit.
The problem, which you are completely ignoring because 'omg think of the children' over reactions is what happens when the first responders take out a drone for bullshit reasons, like the cops who shoot down a drone recording them breaking the law and beating someone on the side of the road?
First responders are people, nothing more. Many of them will abuse any power they're granted. Not all, but many, and if you want to avoid having those professions attract people who abuse power, you must properly constraint that power. Otherwise, people react like you, with a whole bunch of reasons to 'do the right thing'... but all the reasons as simply wrong due to ignorance such as your own.
Re:Few people understand the economics
on
On Being Pro-GPL
·
· Score: 1
Sorry Bruce, I think you're entirely off the mark on this one.
The OpenSSL projects problem is its developers being unwilling to make the choices that need to be made for the good of the SSL project itself, not lack of money.
Lack of money certainly could have contributed, but considering what your arguing is that by allowing FEWER people to use it, it would have been handled better... well that just doesn't stand up to me.
Couple with that the number of massive companies that use and depend on OpenSSL who did nothing for it but do contribute back to BSD licensed projects regularly... and the number of companies that simply avoid OpenSSL (Apple, Amazon, Microsoft, eBay, PayPal, American Express, Bank of America and many other large financial institutions) because its a total mess when they could contribute to it...
OpenSSL is an exhibit in how not to write security related code, not lack of funding. The lack of funding is a side effect of the silly SSLeay license crap thrown in and crap code. Just because it was the most popular doesn't mean it was the best, or even good.
Slashdot Mirror
A recent Childline poll found nearly 10% of 12-13-year-olds were worried they were addicted to pornography
Because you told them that because they looked at one image in a magazine that they were addicted. You set them up to answer that way, likely by saying 'Are you addicted to porn' while shaking your head yes at them suggestively.
A 12-13 year old has no fucking clue what addiction is, even if they were. I'm fairly certain based on its usage here that no one involved in the study or conversation about the study knows what addiction actually is to.
Infatuation is not addiction morons.
18% had seen shocking or upsetting images.
Actually its 100%, but the other 82% were smart enough not to mention the shit they've seen mommy and daddy do. The real world sucks, if they can't cope with 'upsetting images' then porn is the least of your concern and hiding the kid in a card board box for the rest of his/her life so they don't have to survive on their own might be your best bet.
As a result of our work with industry, more than 90% of UK consumers are offered the choice to easily configure their internet service through family-friendly filters
And 0% Use it because the parents aren't the ones that are freaked out about their kids looking at porn.
How sad is your world view when you think see two people do something entirely natural and REQUIRED FOR THE SURVIVAL OF OUR SPECIES and it offends you. And then to top it off, you have to freak out and project your personal issues with seeing boobies on to 12-13 year olds and convince them they are 'addicted' to something. 12-14 year olds are addicted to EVERYTHING THATS TABOO. If you told them it was dirty and sexual to brush their teeth 4 times a day, England would suddenly have the worlds healthiest teeth in the 12-13 year old group.
This kind of ignorance is spewed from some jack ass who doesn't have a kid (or isn't actually a parent to the kid) and doesn't realize that it will actually make MORE kids look at MORE porn.
How the fuck do people get old and totally forget what being a kid was like. It blows me away.
leaves pure Zirconium. Which is typically used as cladding for nuclear fuel rods. Something that a fair portion of the world would freak out about, because anything that's good for nuclear must be bad. Plus there's this gem: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Well, they should get to the freaking out part because Zirconium isn't exactly uncommon or difficult to produce. Its a by product of all sorts of mining processes and fairly common within the Earths crust.
And if you want to throw prices out there, $900/ton for Zirconium makes it cheaper than stainless, so if anyone was going to freak out about it ... they would have.
and is able to compile a mach kernal and the whole OS using the same language.
Yea, Swift is as capable of doing this are Perl or Python is. Just because you can write a one liner that is essentially function_call_to_a_million_lines_of_C_code() doesn't mean you can do anything in the language. Apple certainly hasn't ported the kernel or any substantial parts of the OS to Swift and they aren't going to.
Swift is for people who don't know how to code, not for people who do. People who do know how to code still use C.
No, it says more about the bad benchmark than anything else.
I'm not impressed that ARM can NOP as fast as an i3 to put it bluntly.
I say this because if you look at the bench marks and the way they did it. They compile arm variants in fully optimized mode, and x86 variants generic x86 code. From that point on, reading is a waste of time. Might as well compile with debugging on from a bench mark perspective.
Its intentionally skewed.
Baro measurements are accurate to about 5' at these altitudes
Not in an airplane. Only when calibrated and stationary and there is no change to air pressure occurring. So basically no where outside of a completely controlled/sealed lab.
In the real world a gust of wind can give you enough of a pressure differential (not from the wind itself, just the actual static pressure change) to sway your measurement hundreds of feet. They are also sensitive to light and heat, and you can easily sway 20-30 feet from just moving the drone from a sunny area to a shaded area.
A laser altimeter doesn't suffer from those problems, granted, but putting those on drones means installing a device thats large and costs more than the drone itself in most cases.
Because rockets were actually working at that point, maybe not refined, but still useful. Quantum computer is not useful in any way at this time.
Quantum computing is still at the mumbo jumbo stage where they make really bold claims about what it can do in 1 or 2 really specific instances that all of 8 people on the planet care about, but then never follow through with a quantum machine that out performs a classical one in any way.
Oh, and the answer(s) may not even be right and has to be checked using classical methods anyway.
Show me one that doesn't require a special FAB to produce the actual chip, at which point you can't control whats actually going on in the chip itself.
There are NO open source CPUs, only open source designs.
It stops being open source when it needs to run on a proprietary FPGA.
Why would I give slashdot access to my Google account info? See I created separate accounts instead of bitching that people could figure out that I was a douche across all my sites using the same account.
And lets point out, I'm using an account thats 15 years old, you aren't even logged in.
Then you're just stupid.
I've had at least 3 Google accounts since before G+ existed and added another 2 while G+ existed. Its pretty simple to create a new account with or without a real name, which hasn't been a requirement for a while now, thanks for paying attention to what you're whining about ...
Windows XP comes in Desktop, Embedded and POS variants, when they don't tell you which one, you assume the most ill suited?
You aren't real bright, are you?
Every computer has an OS, its just a question of how complex it is.
XP Embedded is not XP desktop anymore than Android is Debian. They aren't running a desktop OS any more than your cell phone is.
XP Embedded is not unsupported, and you're an idiot since you seem to think you have some non-buggy OS. The fact that you make such a comment tells me you know so little about software dev that you have no business even commenting in this conversation. All software has bugs.
The OS wasn't compromised, and XP embedded is pretty secure ... it doesn't run anything out of the box, so its pretty safe.
You choose Windows because the Win32 API has a couple of metric fucktons of developers available that are JUST as capable as random Linux developer that thinks he's kind shit just because he runs Linux even though his software is just as exploitable on Linux as it is on XP.
How ignorant do you have to be to make such retarded statements? Pretty fucking ignorant I'd say.
Because?
No, you have no reason why XP is wrong for the job, you're just parroting what you've heard others say without understanding why.
In an embedded environment with limited attack vectors, XP is fine.
Note: They aren't even attacking XP here, they are attacking the software Brink's themselves wrote. Might be a good idea to get a clue before blaming the wrong thing fanboy.
So the argument all along has been
I don't want to have the same profile across all my google products but I want to login with the same profile across all the products
Which, to put it bluntly, is fucking retarded.
If you want different profiles, create different accounts. Your identity is your identity, its pretty stupid to use the same account across all the platforms but different names, the only person you're fooling is yourself, for everyone else we can still easily link your various google accounts to the same login, but hey, you go ahead and pretend because you can now use a different alias on youtube that no one can figure out who you are when you go trolling.
So big fucking woop, you don't have to give google the 3 lines it requires for a Google+ profile in one place ... now you're going to do it in EVERY place.
If you're one of the people who think this is good, you really are stupid and need to put your tin foil hat away. Its not even hiding you from anything.
Yes, this post is inflammatory, its supposed to be, its targeted at the trolls who think hiding behind their half assed pseudonym is clever even when logging in with the same email address/account everywhere.
real desire. It's totally possible to have a proprietary license with source provided to the customer.
That's still open source. Contrary to what Stallman and the libretards have tried to do and usurp the wording, open source doesn't mean giving it away for free. It means the source is available, maybe even at an additional cost.
It's only GPL fanboys that think OSS implies free. OSS software predates Stallman and FSF, GNU and GPL, he didn't come up with the idea ... He just tried to usurp it and twist it to his own narrow definition based on his viral agenda.
I fly drones (real ones, not this crap that DJI sells, those are just Quads with some halfassed flight controllers).
I think this is GREAT. This is simply common sense. Someone else's property is not yours to do with as you wish, that includes public lands.
Quads ARE DANGEROUS when they are large enough to carry a camera. A drop from even 10 feet above your head with a 5 pound object is MORE than enough to be RELIABLY LEATHAL.
like the trunk which opens automatically when you put your foot under the car and you are nearby. This is just a big gift for thieves, just wait for tourists with a car full of stuff to leave their car, stand in the vicinity and put your foot under the car when they leave but they are still near enough to allow the trunk to open...
Awe, isn't that cute, you're talking about shit you know nothing about.
In order for that trunk to open, your key has to be within about 1/3rd of a meter from the trunk lock or it doesn't open, so if I'm close enough that you can get into the trunk that way, I'm also close enough to just beat your ass for trying, since you two are going to be well within my striking distance at that point. You'd be hard pressed to get your foot under there with me close enough because I'm going to be in between you and the sensor or the sensor is going to ignore you.
And by the way, that sensor ... its a kick button, not just an IR pickup or something.
Same for the doors, you have to be within about a foot of the door. You can't unlock the doors from the outside when the key is on the inside. You can't unlock or open any of the doors with the key at or more than a meter away from the door you're trying to unlock.
You're missing the point here. They know how to deal with keys reasonable well, this is not new. In fact anything that requires physical presence they are generally pretty good with these days. There isn't a lot new here even if you think keyless entry is, it isn't.
They don't know shit about dealing with radio connected cars that can be touched by people anywhere on the planet. THATS why this DAB thing is a possibility, previously the only people who could 'hack' the car, were physically in contact with the car, which is an easy problem to deal, Smith & Wesson sells a product for this. What they can't deal with is when some random person somewhere far away that you can't see or detect until your left front wheel locks up because someone remotely commanded the ABS/TCS system to lock the wheel. No one in the car would do that because it's dangerous to them. The dude sitting in his chair miles away? He'll do it because he's an arrogant prick that thinks he's special cause he downloaded some hax0r app where someone else did all the work and doesn't realize that being a script kiddie just makes him a douche, not powerful and impressive.
... Participating in the music (i.e. singing along or head banging) is more than just listening. Which is where you fail to understand my statement.
Simply listening to music in the background while doing another task nearly universally makes people more productive and more focused than without.
Bottom line, anything that distacts you from the task at hand, impairs your ability, contrary to what you may think.
No shit Sherlock, you figure that one out all by yourself? I'm fairly certain that we all know that before any of these studies even started, after all ... THATS THE MEANING OF DISTRACTION.
The point is that music itself is NOT distracting and is in fact helpful. Finding another excuse/distraction to not get the job done is the human's fault, not the music, but hey I'm guessing you're one of those guys that likes to have an excuse for everything, right?
Yes, but in a good way.
Music is something that prevents you from being distracted by other noises, and because you aren't really paying attention to it so it's not a distraction.
you have to remember GPUs have abysmal memory bandwidth (due to being limited by PCIe's 16GB/s to the CPU)
Uhm, no. GPUs have massive bandwidth to THEIR memory. You're talking about lower speeds to memory of A DIFFERENT PROCESSOR, so essentially you're trying to compare using the PCI bus as a network and your direct memory access. These are two different things. GPUs can have far more memory than the systems they are attached to and nVidia has certainly used this as a selling point for their GPGPU stuff. If your GPU is using system memory over the PCI bus, you fucked up your hardware purchase. When you think of the PCI bus as a network bus, which is what its used for in the instance you're referring to, then its about as fast as you can find within several orders of magnitude of cost. The problem with GPUs is branching, not memory.
3.Programming is the biggest difficulty, and will make or break our company and processor. The DARPA grant is specifically for continued research and work on our development tools, which are intended to automate the unique features of our memory system. We have some papers in the works and will be talking pubicly about our *very* cool software in the next couple of months.
You've never heard of Itanium, have you? Unless you can change this so that your model fits the existing developer base, you're screwed. Seriously, go read up on Itanium, trust me, you'll realize that your best bet is to figure out how to blow as much of the money as you can on vacations and fun things before it disappears.
and stack machines are notorious for having HORRIBLE support for languages like C.
So basically everything anyone that matters understands about software dev ... won't work on your machine. Well thats handy, at least you'll have an excuse as to why no one can make useful software for your system.
have been around for over 10 years and have given nothing but talks with powerpoints (though they clearly are very intelligent and have an interesting architectures) says a lot about their future viability. I hate to be a downer like that
Thats okay, you're just too young and inexperienced to realize you'll be lucky if you last that long.
All commercially built helicopters are designed for large bird strikes, a Phantom impacting the rotor or tail rotor is unlikely to cause very much damage. You're imagining a full on direct impact with the main mass of the phantom, which would never happen, its just going to hit one or two of the arms the motors are attached to and that impact will send the rest of the phantom away from the rotor at significant speed and certainly leave the phantom in no flyable shape so its not going to happen again.
LiPo batteries that you're talking about, are far from dense, thats why they are used in aircraft, low mass == low weight == better flight performance
...
Its unlikely to cause very much damage to the tail rotor actually, a dent or something, maybe some vibration, but nothing thats going to down the aircraft. Tail rotors aren't made out of Balsa and a Phantom is pretty small.
And further more, 'major'' damage to the tail rotor isn't going to be something the pilot can deal with. The tail rotor either works well enough to fly and the pilot won't really notice, or it fails to the point where it doesn't counter act the torque of the main rotors, in which cause the pilot's skill level doesn't matter, the aircraft can not be 'flown' in any sense of the word. In order to not spin around in circles till he passes out, then dies, he's going to auto rotate the craft immediately, which means a very hard landing in an almost certainly unplanned place. While this is a maneuver that heli pilots are required to train for ... its also one that doesn't actually go well when you do it in a real situation. People tend to get hurt very badly or die in an auto rotation.
Do YOU want to be in a helicopter when a drone gets sucked into its intake.
You run on the second turbine until you can land. These aren't single engine craft.
The helicopter's engine likely stalls
Helicopters don't 'stall', thats fixed wing aircraft.
the helicopter then goes into autorotation if you are lucky
This isn't optional, its the way they work, autorotation happens without any intervention from the pilot at any point when the turbine is producing less power than the energy stored in the rotors. If this did not happen, powering down the turbine would cause the aircraft to spin out of control in circles due to the torque differences. This happens in normal operations, it is in fact required just to turn the damn thing off on the ground.
landing in the fire you are trying to put out.
You don't drop flame retardant materials in the middle of the fire, you drop them on the edges or small sections, making it trivial to 'not land in the fire', though your alternative landing sites are probably effectively dangerous due to terrain ... otherwise you'd use a fire truck.
What if the drone smashes into your windshield in limited visibility, knocking the pilot out cold or worse.
The wind shields of modern aircraft are designed for heavy high speed impacts, unless you fly into a predator drone, this is unlikely to be a problem. A helicopter simply doesn't fly fast enough (and can't due to the laws of physics) to make this a serious issue.
You are very wrong here. Look at the airplane that landed in the Hudson River that was taken out by a goose. Seriously, a goose, a lot of drones are of similar weight or larger, also a lot softer.
It was taken out by multiple, in multiple engines. It flew into a flock of them. Not one, not two, but more than 4 at a minimum judging by insturmentation.
If bird strikes are a hazard, how would a drone NOT be a hazard?
They are a hazard and should be removed from the picture in emergency situations in whatever way the first responders see fit.
The problem, which you are completely ignoring because 'omg think of the children' over reactions is what happens when the first responders take out a drone for bullshit reasons, like the cops who shoot down a drone recording them breaking the law and beating someone on the side of the road?
First responders are people, nothing more. Many of them will abuse any power they're granted. Not all, but many, and if you want to avoid having those professions attract people who abuse power, you must properly constraint that power. Otherwise, people react like you, with a whole bunch of reasons to 'do the right thing' ... but all the reasons as simply wrong due to ignorance such as your own.
Sorry Bruce, I think you're entirely off the mark on this one.
The OpenSSL projects problem is its developers being unwilling to make the choices that need to be made for the good of the SSL project itself, not lack of money.
Lack of money certainly could have contributed, but considering what your arguing is that by allowing FEWER people to use it, it would have been handled better ... well that just doesn't stand up to me.
Couple with that the number of massive companies that use and depend on OpenSSL who did nothing for it but do contribute back to BSD licensed projects regularly ... and the number of companies that simply avoid OpenSSL (Apple, Amazon, Microsoft, eBay, PayPal, American Express, Bank of America and many other large financial institutions) because its a total mess when they could contribute to it ...
OpenSSL is an exhibit in how not to write security related code, not lack of funding. The lack of funding is a side effect of the silly SSLeay license crap thrown in and crap code. Just because it was the most popular doesn't mean it was the best, or even good.
Because fuck those rednecks, that's why.
Ironic isn't it. That simple statement there is the biggest part of the problem.
Why can't people just accept that other people have different beliefs and stay away?
Its one thing when a racist fuck forces something on you, its an entirely THE SAME THING when you want to force yourself on some racist fuck.
And just for reference, it is not illegal to run your business in a racist manner, like 'whites only', its just REALLY difficult.