I'm fully aware of the histories there. You actually made my entire point.
And while "falling for centuries" is true, just the same there tends to be points in time at which historians point and say that's the beginning of the end. That's a decisive point in history.
Have you never watched scifi? Its well documented fact these gestures existed before Apple stole them as their own. Period.
Hell, I even remember all the Apple fanboyz pretending it was something new and novel when Apple rolled it out and myself and several others looked at each other thinking WTF - we've seen this in movies for many years.
Seriously, are you so detached from reality and so tethered to Apple's nipple you honestly have no clue these gestures long existed before Apple stole them and claimed them as their own?
The fact you've bothered to correct a post which took about three seconds to create, while still fully comprehensible, IMOHO, is the greater travesty.
Seriously, look at my posts. I long gave up on caring about typos and spelling errors on/. posts. Most people on/. are beneath contempt. As such, my posts tend to reflect this fact. Basically it boils down to, I don't give a shit for 99% of my posts.
I keep hearing this. Oddly enough, back when Linux had 1% of the desktop market, its continued to grow on desktops.
People seem extremely confused about what this all means. Will Linux every have 80% of the desktop market? Not likely. Is the current desktop count under reported? Extremely likely. Realistically, the year of the Linux desktop arrived years ago. As you said, 80% is some/. nerd, idiot, fantasy. Just the same, Linux likely has something between 5%-8% of the desktop market. And frankly, even 1% means the Linux desktop has arrived.
With the idiocy which claims the Linux desktop hasn't arrived means OSX hasn't arrived either. That's dumb and by all reasonable accounts, completely untrue.
Realistically, the lie is that the Linux desktop is a lie.
You mean the same new aircraft carrier that has far inferior planes on it and doesn't stand a chance against even sub-standard submarines?
You're talking way outside your depth here. Their planes are very comparable to super hornets. This is a fairly "Hollywood" video, but the plane should not be discounted. In a conflict, very likely THE deciding factor would be pilot training, experience, and tactics; ignoring the super hornet likely retains a slight edge. Even still, their short range A2A missiles have twice the range ours do and are known to be as effective or moreso.
As for the sub comment, one of our subs would have to get close enough, which would likely prove iffy unless caught in open waters.
I can honestly say I've not read a single comment which is "cheering" for China. Regardless, you're
China JUST GOT a SINGLE carrier, with no escorts. Its not like we're talking about taking out The Isle of Man's Atlantic battle fleet... which is a dingy with a couple outboard motors on it.
China has four carriers. Three were purchased from Russia. At least one of those is a very modern design (1980s), very comparable to what Briton deploys (likely a generation beyond). One of the three is expected to be begin trials next year. China is also building two other carrier based on their own designs. By the end of the decade, expect China to have at least four fully equipped and highly capable carriers in the water.
Your depiction of them as dingys is also extremely misleading and disingenuous. Its true they are not super carriers such as the US deploys. But, their roles are entirely different. For the US, its nuclear super carrier fleet is about projection of power and policy. For China, its about actual territorial control and fleet defense. Which is not to suggest super carriers are incapable of such a role.
Basically, China/Russian fleet missions are almost exactly opposite from US/NATO doctrine. For the US, everything centers around protecting carriers; largely allow the carrier to project power. For China/Russia, everything centers around protecting subs. Basically, the US follows the lessons learned from WWII; which provided victory. While China/Russia follow the lessons learned from Germany's WWII and more modern conflicts that you can easily deny access and control large lanes with subs. And modern diesel subs, including those deployed by China, are more quite and at home in the water's China has interest than any US subs. And don't allow Germany's defeat to lull you into believing German's efforts were bad. The simple fact is, they were out produced and massively over extended. That, however, does not invalidate their tactics in the least. The fact is, technology has significantly improved which further empowers those original tactics and strategies.
The fact that China is finally developing what can be a very effective navy while saber rattling about territorial waters, fishing grounds, owning various island nations (some of which are US protectorates), and is absolutely creating a navy/weapon platforms which can pose very serious risk to even a US super carrier group. In short, comparisons with "dingys" is idiotic. China's naval development is a very real reason for concern.
Power is unreliable and blackouts happen several times a day.
Sadly, you just described portions of the US too. Even worse, this will become ever more common over the next decade. If left unchecked, and utility companies are not required to maintain and repair the equipment they've already been paid *twice* to do so, within two decades the US will have a second world power infrastructure. The peak reliability for the US power grid was in the 1970s. Its been at a steady decline ever since even though our utility rates (and lump sum government payments via taxes) have literally paid to do it properly twice now.
Just to clarify, you mean years after the concept was publicly performed by others, whereby Apple stole it and then patented some else's concept (which long persisted in scifi and movies). Their pinch/zoom patent, in addition to being extremely obvious, was stolen from others. The fact Apple applied for such a stolen/obvious concept in addition to the fact it was granted, in of itself, shows how fucked in the head Apple is, not to mention how fucked up the patent system is.
I don't know if that's a cheeky response or not, but assuming you have any clue about the topic, its seemingly impossible to not read that as a statement of full agreement.
Projection of power is about what can be seen - not knowing something merely exists.
When a carrier groups parks outside your window, the thought isn't, "So that's what a carrier group looks like." Rather, the message is, "This is a nice reminder to pull your head from ass else we'll do it for you." Or perhaps, "You have our full support. We're here to help." Regardless, physical presence is almost everything in that projection of power.
I'd imagine the technology would be transfered to missles.. at that speed do you even need explosives?
Depends on the target. For slow moving objects like people, tanks, buildings, and so on, no explosives needed. For objects like planes, probably so unless they can score a hit with > 90% confidence or so; which is a pretty tall order for something moving that fast. Though maybe not. If the target doesn't know its coming and/or even if it does, how fast can the target evade when a missile is headed your way at mach 20+.
No it hasn't. They used a massively strongly signal, physical adjacent, than would ever be observed in the wild - unless the sole purpose was to create interference. Which oddly enough, was the entire purpose of the test.
Simple fact is, there exists no credible proof WIFI has EVER interfered with an aircraft.
What a complete bullshit rant. I actually support social security. But social security should ONLY be used for what its designed to be used for. You do understand HALF of every medicare dollar is used on fraud? And even with that, the US ranks 13th-20th in the world of industrialized nations for medial care. You do understand that roughly HALF of those receiving social benefits should be receiving ZERO.
I have no problem with care. I am an advocate of social services. But none of that changes that people like you who are in denial of reality are the second biggest problem this country has. Wanting social services and paying for them are two entirely different things. Fucking everyone so that people who should get nothing is really fucking stupid - and yet that's the entire bases of your position.
Since when did Slashdot become "news for nerds with room temperature IQs?"
You seem to have forgotten this is slashdot. Most of the high IQ posters left a while ago. Most of all that's left are room temperature IQs - and worse.
I don't actively seek out such movies; not that I mind. My point being, unless there are super hot chicks in each scene, the movie doesn't seem to have anything else to offer.
We have a winner. Those people who keep offering its a plausible story are completely out of touch with reality. I don't think, "plausible", means what they think it does. They seem to be confused because plausible and completely impossible.
Ugh. That means within roughly five to tens seconds of seeing the first preview I had the entire fucking movie figured out. Fucking pathetic.
Holy shit that is a horrible, piece of shit movie. Hollywood is now officially flinging monkey poo on movie goers - and charging the masses for the honor.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm fully aware of the histories there. You actually made my entire point.
And while "falling for centuries" is true, just the same there tends to be points in time at which historians point and say that's the beginning of the end. That's a decisive point in history.
Have you never watched scifi? Its well documented fact these gestures existed before Apple stole them as their own. Period.
Hell, I even remember all the Apple fanboyz pretending it was something new and novel when Apple rolled it out and myself and several others looked at each other thinking WTF - we've seen this in movies for many years.
Seriously, are you so detached from reality and so tethered to Apple's nipple you honestly have no clue these gestures long existed before Apple stole them and claimed them as their own?
You are of course correct.
The fact you've bothered to correct a post which took about three seconds to create, while still fully comprehensible, IMOHO, is the greater travesty.
Seriously, look at my posts. I long gave up on caring about typos and spelling errors on /. posts. Most people on /. are beneath contempt. As such, my posts tend to reflect this fact. Basically it boils down to, I don't give a shit for 99% of my posts.
hostile support community
That's a new one.
and general lack of hardware support (desktop)
That's just simply not true. Linux has superior hardware support than does Vista and Win 7.
Opps...you're absolutely right.
"Idiocy" comment retracted.
I keep hearing this. Oddly enough, back when Linux had 1% of the desktop market, its continued to grow on desktops.
People seem extremely confused about what this all means. Will Linux every have 80% of the desktop market? Not likely. Is the current desktop count under reported? Extremely likely. Realistically, the year of the Linux desktop arrived years ago. As you said, 80% is some /. nerd, idiot, fantasy. Just the same, Linux likely has something between 5%-8% of the desktop market. And frankly, even 1% means the Linux desktop has arrived.
With the idiocy which claims the Linux desktop hasn't arrived means OSX hasn't arrived either. That's dumb and by all reasonable accounts, completely untrue.
Realistically, the lie is that the Linux desktop is a lie.
I depends on if you consider military tactics and strategy to be a technology. But even still, "always fallen", is extremely reaching.
"every nation on Earth has a cellular infrastructure in place, why not just use that?"
Because you can be traced/tracked by those outside the battlefield, basically making it an intelligence coo.
You mean the same new aircraft carrier that has far inferior planes on it and doesn't stand a chance against even sub-standard submarines?
You're talking way outside your depth here. Their planes are very comparable to super hornets. This is a fairly "Hollywood" video, but the plane should not be discounted. In a conflict, very likely THE deciding factor would be pilot training, experience, and tactics; ignoring the super hornet likely retains a slight edge. Even still, their short range A2A missiles have twice the range ours do and are known to be as effective or moreso.
As for the sub comment, one of our subs would have to get close enough, which would likely prove iffy unless caught in open waters.
I can honestly say I've not read a single comment which is "cheering" for China. Regardless, you're
China JUST GOT a SINGLE carrier, with no escorts. Its not like we're talking about taking out The Isle of Man's Atlantic battle fleet ... which is a dingy with a couple outboard motors on it.
China has four carriers. Three were purchased from Russia. At least one of those is a very modern design (1980s), very comparable to what Briton deploys (likely a generation beyond). One of the three is expected to be begin trials next year. China is also building two other carrier based on their own designs. By the end of the decade, expect China to have at least four fully equipped and highly capable carriers in the water.
Your depiction of them as dingys is also extremely misleading and disingenuous. Its true they are not super carriers such as the US deploys. But, their roles are entirely different. For the US, its nuclear super carrier fleet is about projection of power and policy. For China, its about actual territorial control and fleet defense. Which is not to suggest super carriers are incapable of such a role.
Basically, China/Russian fleet missions are almost exactly opposite from US/NATO doctrine. For the US, everything centers around protecting carriers; largely allow the carrier to project power. For China/Russia, everything centers around protecting subs. Basically, the US follows the lessons learned from WWII; which provided victory. While China/Russia follow the lessons learned from Germany's WWII and more modern conflicts that you can easily deny access and control large lanes with subs. And modern diesel subs, including those deployed by China, are more quite and at home in the water's China has interest than any US subs. And don't allow Germany's defeat to lull you into believing German's efforts were bad. The simple fact is, they were out produced and massively over extended. That, however, does not invalidate their tactics in the least. The fact is, technology has significantly improved which further empowers those original tactics and strategies.
The fact that China is finally developing what can be a very effective navy while saber rattling about territorial waters, fishing grounds, owning various island nations (some of which are US protectorates), and is absolutely creating a navy/weapon platforms which can pose very serious risk to even a US super carrier group. In short, comparisons with "dingys" is idiotic. China's naval development is a very real reason for concern.
Power is unreliable and blackouts happen several times a day.
Sadly, you just described portions of the US too. Even worse, this will become ever more common over the next decade. If left unchecked, and utility companies are not required to maintain and repair the equipment they've already been paid *twice* to do so, within two decades the US will have a second world power infrastructure. The peak reliability for the US power grid was in the 1970s. Its been at a steady decline ever since even though our utility rates (and lump sum government payments via taxes) have literally paid to do it properly twice now.
Please refresh our memories. What did Google steal? I mean what specifically did they steal?
Just to clarify, you mean years after the concept was publicly performed by others, whereby Apple stole it and then patented some else's concept (which long persisted in scifi and movies). Their pinch/zoom patent, in addition to being extremely obvious, was stolen from others. The fact Apple applied for such a stolen/obvious concept in addition to the fact it was granted, in of itself, shows how fucked in the head Apple is, not to mention how fucked up the patent system is.
Nuclear missiles don't project power. They are a deterrent and a projection of death.
People don't fear launch of nuclear missiles from the US. They do, however, fear the arrival of a US carrier group off their shores.
I don't know if that's a cheeky response or not, but assuming you have any clue about the topic, its seemingly impossible to not read that as a statement of full agreement.
If not, please explain.
Projection of power is about what can be seen - not knowing something merely exists.
When a carrier groups parks outside your window, the thought isn't, "So that's what a carrier group looks like." Rather, the message is, "This is a nice reminder to pull your head from ass else we'll do it for you." Or perhaps, "You have our full support. We're here to help." Regardless, physical presence is almost everything in that projection of power.
I'd imagine the technology would be transfered to missles.. at that speed do you even need explosives?
Depends on the target. For slow moving objects like people, tanks, buildings, and so on, no explosives needed. For objects like planes, probably so unless they can score a hit with > 90% confidence or so; which is a pretty tall order for something moving that fast. Though maybe not. If the target doesn't know its coming and/or even if it does, how fast can the target evade when a missile is headed your way at mach 20+.
No it hasn't. They used a massively strongly signal, physical adjacent, than would ever be observed in the wild - unless the sole purpose was to create interference. Which oddly enough, was the entire purpose of the test.
Simple fact is, there exists no credible proof WIFI has EVER interfered with an aircraft.
What a complete bullshit rant. I actually support social security. But social security should ONLY be used for what its designed to be used for. You do understand HALF of every medicare dollar is used on fraud? And even with that, the US ranks 13th-20th in the world of industrialized nations for medial care. You do understand that roughly HALF of those receiving social benefits should be receiving ZERO.
I have no problem with care. I am an advocate of social services. But none of that changes that people like you who are in denial of reality are the second biggest problem this country has. Wanting social services and paying for them are two entirely different things. Fucking everyone so that people who should get nothing is really fucking stupid - and yet that's the entire bases of your position.
Since when did Slashdot become "news for nerds with room temperature IQs?"
You seem to have forgotten this is slashdot. Most of the high IQ posters left a while ago. Most of all that's left are room temperature IQs - and worse.
I don't actively seek out such movies; not that I mind. My point being, unless there are super hot chicks in each scene, the movie doesn't seem to have anything else to offer.
We have a winner. Those people who keep offering its a plausible story are completely out of touch with reality. I don't think, "plausible", means what they think it does. They seem to be confused because plausible and completely impossible.
Ugh. That means within roughly five to tens seconds of seeing the first preview I had the entire fucking movie figured out. Fucking pathetic.
Holy shit that is a horrible, piece of shit movie. Hollywood is now officially flinging monkey poo on movie goers - and charging the masses for the honor.
Sounds like the fall of mankind has begun...
The problem is, before the end of year one, all the apes are dead.
So Year 25 looks like this: 0
You mean all five of those apes.
The technology base and numbers of humans in comparison is completely insurmountable. Which is why the entire concept is beyond absurd.