Attach a GPS and when it gets within a mile or two of destination it can detonate. Yep. The only difficult part is sending the GPS satellites back in time to the 1960s.
Every time people discuss Apple making a normal desktop computer, someone comes out with this strawman that they're askng Apple to lower their quality somehow. That isn't the case in any way, shape or form.
Quality has a price, and it's less than what Apple charges. Using laptop parts, and paying design firms to fit it all together into super-miniature cases doesn't equal quality, it just means the computer is smaller. Some people might want to pay hundreds of dollars extra to have a small computer, but many people don't and the size of the computer has nothing to do with its quality.
Simply building a normal desktop computer would reduce costs, improve performance, or both. It would further raise the cost-effectiveness by making it easier to upgrade components such as RAM, hard drives and maybe more. If a regular desktop computer is "cheap crap", then I take it you consider the Mac Pro to be cheap crap because it isn't a miniature novelty design?
Why didn't they have some provision to cut power to the weapon? If they were testing it in a place where there were people exposed in its possible field of fire (effectively "downrange"), they should have taken precautions.
If you had an encrypted USB stick and you become incapacitated, you wouldn't be be able to tell them what the key was. There would have to be some way for emergency personnel to access the records without help from the patient.
The warheads are not armed per se, that's true. But if they were properly loaded then the B52 would have controlled the arming, i.e. they would have gone live had they been fired. I'm not sure if the nuclear warheads on cruise missiles work the same way, but nobody on a submarine can arm its nuclear missile warheads without the proper codes, which are supposed to be held only by the top leadership on land, with the "nuclear football" and all that. The warheads are designed to be impossible to arm without the codes. If the cruise missile warheads are similar, there's no way they could have detonated.
For example, El Ron wrote that, before implantation, the Thetans were transported aboard jumbo jets... in space. How do we fit this into our orthodox understanding of perception? Why are we only including convenient excerpts in our metaphor? Was El Ron's intention really to lay out an orthodox perspective carefully disguised as junk sci-fi? I've heard described as, they believe that that "space opera" stuff really did happen literally, including space planes and all sorts of things from 20th century culture and fiction. It sounds ridiculous, but the idea is that we have ingrained memories of these old civilizations, and those memories ended up being expressed by writers who mistakenly think they're just writing fiction, and people who think they're inventing airplanes when they're really just re-creating old technology.
It's really sort of ingenieous, if that's indeed the way they explain it.
There was a Rolling Stone interview, though, where a representative acknowledged the Xenu thing. He claimed that it wasn't history, or a "story", it's an auditing level and it's impossible to explain to an outsider what that means.
3. Much music is listened to via headphones these days. If you're trying to get the purest recording and reproduction of acoustic instruments, a pair of earbuds isn't going to cut it. Not a whole lot of popular music today requires pure recording and reproduction of acoustic instruments anyway, so what's the difference? I disagree on this point. With headphones you can get good sound for much less money than speakers. Not with cheap earbuds, but a good pair of open-backed headphones can give you the same clarity as speakers costing up to 10 times as much. High-quality in-ear monitors are also becoming more popular for use with mp3 players.
Logistics is a huge, huge part of war. Improving fuel mileage lets them move further and with less support. Also it reduces costs, as gas is expensive when you have to ship it around the world and through combat zones. Of course they still burn a lot and they're not doing this for the sake of emissions, but if they could cut fuel use in, say, half it would be a great advantage in a war.
Using the heat of crystallization of Pine resin is a really cool idea, but it seems unlikely there is that much heat capacity there. Dang, my CRC handbook doesnt list that number.
Why not? If you filled your walls with ice there would be a lot ot heat capacity. I don't know how pine resin compares to water, but if it's similar then it could be useful.
"Quality" does not equal making a desktop computer really, really small and building it like a laptop. They could make a tower computer with good build quality and they could even make it pretty if they wanted. If they did this, they would not have the costs of using laptop parts such as mobile processors and 2.5" hard drives, or of the fancy engineering required to make it all fit together in a tiny case, and possibly to manage heat in such tight packages. Just remove those factors, and you save some amount of money. That's all I'm asking.
There's expense put into quality, and expense put into making the computers small, and they aren't the same thing at all. I'm suggesting that they build a normal, quality deskop computer, at a price point less than a used car.
Don't you consider the Mac Pro to be "quality" like the rest of the Apple computers? It's a normal tower format, not a tiny novelty computer, but from what I hear it's well-built. All I want is that same approch in a computer closer to the Mini price point.
But why? They don't have to drop in quality just to lower costs or build "budget PCs." All they have to do is stop putting so much money into building them like laptops. Just do that, and reduce the prices by that much. There's no reason in the world why that would make the quality suffer.
It's like, someone builds a car that costs $250,000, with 125 horsepower and bench seats for 4.
"This car is overpriced." "No, it isn't. It takes a lot of money to build a car like it's an airplane, you know. Airplanes are expensive. Everything's different: engineering, certification and all. You skimp on that, and you'll fall right out of the sky."
Well, who the hell told you to build a car like it was an airplane?
Who cares if it's bigger? The last version was bigger than this version, and it was small. Do you people actually use your computers, or do you stand over them wanking while measuring them with a micrometer?
(I personally use Macs because they have an OS that just works, without viruses. I just want a computer, and to suggest I should buy a Mac Pro to get standard, expected features that come in computers that cost ten times less is outrageous.)
People think this has something to do with ballistic missiles, but it might be something else. Our newly planned Ares rocket designs will use engines and possibly other elements derived from the Saturn rockets. Maybe they think the new vehicles might be targeted by terrorists or a foreign power for some reason. Does anyone know?
The next Mac Mini will be a seamless, featureless white 4-inch sphere. All input and output will all be through Bluetooth and Wi-fi, and power will come from either an induction charger or by placing the Mini in a dish of hot water.
I'm totally ripping this off from someone, but I don't remember where.
Isn't the "book death" for chess much, much farther off than for checkers? I recall hearing that the number of possible chess games was something astronomical, like the number of atoms in the universe or something. In chess there are many more possible ways to move the pieces, so it multiplies over checkers many times, for each move. I don't know know how common the Fischer Random Chess is, but I don't think it's replacing normal chess nor is normal chess remotely near being solved.
Verizon sells it, $150 retail or free with a contract. I can't comment on quality myself. Also they've had some basic Nokia candybar phones such as the 3589i in the recent past, which may be available on Ebay now.
I think I've seen other basic phones offered for prepay plans from other companies, and I agree with those saying that this is sort of a pointless thread.
Our military never stopped using propellors. The Reaper uses a turboprop engine, which is a gas turbine (jet-engine) that turns a propellor by a shaft. These are more efficent than turbofans or turbojets at low speeds. The C-130 cargo plane and P-3 Orion antisubmarine plane are examples.
The Reaper has a max weight of 10,000 pounds. As far as pure jets go, most 5-ton planes wouldn't be jets. There may be trainers and things that are, and also cruise missiles. In civilian passenger transport, there is only a very new category of "very light jet" which are 10,000 pounds or under.
As far as piston-driven propellors, we used piston-engined observation planes at least through the Vietnam War. I'm not sure if we currently use any.
Slashdot Mirror
Every time people discuss Apple making a normal desktop computer, someone comes out with this strawman that they're askng Apple to lower their quality somehow. That isn't the case in any way, shape or form.
Quality has a price, and it's less than what Apple charges. Using laptop parts, and paying design firms to fit it all together into super-miniature cases doesn't equal quality, it just means the computer is smaller. Some people might want to pay hundreds of dollars extra to have a small computer, but many people don't and the size of the computer has nothing to do with its quality.
Simply building a normal desktop computer would reduce costs, improve performance, or both. It would further raise the cost-effectiveness by making it easier to upgrade components such as RAM, hard drives and maybe more. If a regular desktop computer is "cheap crap", then I take it you consider the Mac Pro to be cheap crap because it isn't a miniature novelty design?
Your Pentium 4 setup would be worth even more if it had a return key and a tab key.
I don't see a wearable vest catching on in public arcades.
What the fuck? No. Mod parent down as a troll or flamebait. It reads like a veiled threat.
Insightful.
Why didn't they have some provision to cut power to the weapon? If they were testing it in a place where there were people exposed in its possible field of fire (effectively "downrange"), they should have taken precautions.
If you had an encrypted USB stick and you become incapacitated, you wouldn't be be able to tell them what the key was. There would have to be some way for emergency personnel to access the records without help from the patient.
We can have some sympathy for the Uzbeks though, as we all know they are small people who must live in small houses.
It's really sort of ingenieous, if that's indeed the way they explain it.
There was a Rolling Stone interview, though, where a representative acknowledged the Xenu thing. He claimed that it wasn't history, or a "story", it's an auditing level and it's impossible to explain to an outsider what that means.
Why would a real mathematician post a question like this here? He's obviously just another high-school kid trying to cheat on his PDE homework.
Logistics is a huge, huge part of war. Improving fuel mileage lets them move further and with less support. Also it reduces costs, as gas is expensive when you have to ship it around the world and through combat zones. Of course they still burn a lot and they're not doing this for the sake of emissions, but if they could cut fuel use in, say, half it would be a great advantage in a war.
There are other differences. Howard Roark had a rock-hard "body of straight lines and angles"; the Woz, not so much: http://www.woz.es/blog/wp-content/uploads/2006/03/ Steve_Wozniak.jpg
"Quality" does not equal making a desktop computer really, really small and building it like a laptop. They could make a tower computer with good build quality and they could even make it pretty if they wanted. If they did this, they would not have the costs of using laptop parts such as mobile processors and 2.5" hard drives, or of the fancy engineering required to make it all fit together in a tiny case, and possibly to manage heat in such tight packages. Just remove those factors, and you save some amount of money. That's all I'm asking.
There's expense put into quality, and expense put into making the computers small, and they aren't the same thing at all. I'm suggesting that they build a normal, quality deskop computer, at a price point less than a used car.
Don't you consider the Mac Pro to be "quality" like the rest of the Apple computers? It's a normal tower format, not a tiny novelty computer, but from what I hear it's well-built. All I want is that same approch in a computer closer to the Mini price point.
But why? They don't have to drop in quality just to lower costs or build "budget PCs." All they have to do is stop putting so much money into building them like laptops. Just do that, and reduce the prices by that much. There's no reason in the world why that would make the quality suffer.
It's like, someone builds a car that costs $250,000, with 125 horsepower and bench seats for 4.
"This car is overpriced."
"No, it isn't. It takes a lot of money to build a car like it's an airplane, you know. Airplanes are expensive. Everything's different: engineering, certification and all. You skimp on that, and you'll fall right out of the sky."
Well, who the hell told you to build a car like it was an airplane?
Who cares if it's bigger? The last version was bigger than this version, and it was small. Do you people actually use your computers, or do you stand over them wanking while measuring them with a micrometer?
(I personally use Macs because they have an OS that just works, without viruses. I just want a computer, and to suggest I should buy a Mac Pro to get standard, expected features that come in computers that cost ten times less is outrageous.)
Johnny 5 is back, and this time it's personal.
People think this has something to do with ballistic missiles, but it might be something else. Our newly planned Ares rocket designs will use engines and possibly other elements derived from the Saturn rockets. Maybe they think the new vehicles might be targeted by terrorists or a foreign power for some reason. Does anyone know?
The next Mac Mini will be a seamless, featureless white 4-inch sphere. All input and output will all be through Bluetooth and Wi-fi, and power will come from either an induction charger or by placing the Mini in a dish of hot water.
I'm totally ripping this off from someone, but I don't remember where.
Isn't the "book death" for chess much, much farther off than for checkers? I recall hearing that the number of possible chess games was something astronomical, like the number of atoms in the universe or something. In chess there are many more possible ways to move the pieces, so it multiplies over checkers many times, for each move. I don't know know how common the Fischer Random Chess is, but I don't think it's replacing normal chess nor is normal chess remotely near being solved.
Verizon sells it, $150 retail or free with a contract. I can't comment on quality myself. Also they've had some basic Nokia candybar phones such as the 3589i in the recent past, which may be available on Ebay now.
I think I've seen other basic phones offered for prepay plans from other companies, and I agree with those saying that this is sort of a pointless thread.
Our military never stopped using propellors. The Reaper uses a turboprop engine, which is a gas turbine (jet-engine) that turns a propellor by a shaft. These are more efficent than turbofans or turbojets at low speeds. The C-130 cargo plane and P-3 Orion antisubmarine plane are examples.
The Reaper has a max weight of 10,000 pounds. As far as pure jets go, most 5-ton planes wouldn't be jets. There may be trainers and things that are, and also cruise missiles. In civilian passenger transport, there is only a very new category of "very light jet" which are 10,000 pounds or under.
As far as piston-driven propellors, we used piston-engined observation planes at least through the Vietnam War. I'm not sure if we currently use any.