Only one RN ship was lost to an Exocet, HMS Sheffield, but yes poor design, involving the use of aluminium alloys with a low ignition point in the superstructure, and inadequate damage control were blamed. The other ship lost to an Exocet, Atlantic Conveyor, was a bulk carrier leased for the duration carrying Chinooks and Harriers.
Apologies for detail innacuracies, the above is from memory.
Mmm, 6% by volume is a strong beer (at least here in the UK), with alcohol resistant yeasts you can get wine with an alcohol content of 14-14.5% though most kick in at around 12-13%. Maybe you were giving a proof figure?
It's a line from 'Ace of Spades' by Motorhead, the finest Heavy Metal band ever to walk the planet. That aside Lemmy is living proof that the human form can survive incredible amounts of abuse over many years, I suppose it's all about building up a tolerance.
Same here in the Uk, I think may favourite was the guy who rang for an ambulance to fetch him a condom because his girlfriend was hot and ready but he'd run out of contraception.....
Personally I don't count the votes to feel smug or vital to the democratic system, I do it because they pay me, it takes a couple of hours finishing about 11 pm. As I'm doing the count for one of the Manchester wards I'm handily placed at the end of Oxford Rd for a few beers and a bop before weaving home happy in a job well done.
If they're right, they're right.
Which is exactly the problem, you have no way of verifying the accuracy of that count. You're correct that the basic programming algorythm is simple, the difficulty is making it secure, accurate and verifiably so. Open source may help, as you say, Joe Citizen can check the code (whether he knows enough to do so is another matter), but how does he verify that the code he checked is actually what's compiled and running at the polling station.
Every ounce of my concentration was going to these automatic, practically sub-conscious processes
Yeah, it's the complexity of the problem, normally route finding, walking, running etc are automatic, we are highly practised at them. Think back to when you learnt to drive, it took all your concentration. Now the only time when driving needs full concentration is when something out of the ordinary occurs, a tire blows out or someone steps into the road. Those two modes of operation, conscious and automatic, have very different characteristics, conscious processing is highly flexible, it's the learning or creative process and it requires full attention, your 'load average' goes up. Automatic processing however is difficult to modify, it's 'programmed', on the other hand it doesn't add much to your load average. As a problem, running to base camp, becomes more complex than your brain can handle sub-consciously, you switch to conscious processing where you are aware of the problem and the thought processes you use to solve it.
Can I absolutely guarantee my vote went to my choice? No, but I do know it would take a lot of effort to affect the count and get away with it. Each Parliamentary constituency in the UK is made up of a number of wards, in Manchester where I've taken part in the count roughly 5 or 6 wards per constituency. The count for each ward is done by a team of 10 or more people, counting clerks, the returning officer etc, etc. The count is done in full view of the candidates and their representatives who can challenge the procedure at any point. The first count is just to check that the number of ballots in a box matches the number issued at the polling station the box came from. Then the votes are sorted by candidate, then counted per candidate. At the end the total of votes for each candidate (+ spoiled) is checked against the total ballots issued. I'm not saying it would be impossible to mess with the count but it would be difficult, there are so many eyes on the process.
From reading the article all they've done is strapped the morse codes for A and T together, so it's hardly a great time saver, and if people are exchanging email addresses as per the article it would be pretty obvious from the context what the A and T meant. Unless you were Kemel Ataturk I suppose. Oh, one last thing. ARSE, ARSE, ARSE. If the bloody corporate firewall hadn't sulked for the last 5 minutes I'd have got first post.
You lucky bastard, I'm still waiting for that call, pen, paper and letter next to the phone, form bookmarked and ready to go. Did it feel good? Go on, tell me, tell me, WAS IT GOOD?
You do realize that indulging in independant thought like that could get you into a lot of trouble? Hallmark employ a lot of ex special forces types...
So, 'prioritizing packets ensures that a minority of users can't abuse the network resources'. Ok, but surely when you 'prioritize RTP packets' for your phone conversations you are the minority abusing the network? Or is that a little subtle for you?
All fair points, but the cumulative effect is to make it that much more difficult to pass counterfeit notes in any quantity. I don't know about the US but here in the Uk you regularly see 10 notes (very roughly equivalent to $20 at the current exchange rate) checked in both shops and pubs.
The rest of the world uses slightly different sizes for different denominations (very handy for the visually impaired), different designs and different colours in those designs. Very cunning........
Slashdot Mirror
Only one RN ship was lost to an Exocet, HMS Sheffield, but yes poor design, involving the use of aluminium alloys with a low ignition point in the superstructure, and inadequate damage control were blamed. The other ship lost to an Exocet, Atlantic Conveyor, was a bulk carrier leased for the duration carrying Chinooks and Harriers.
Apologies for detail innacuracies, the above is from memory.
where the Navy was able to remotely control a ship more than 3,000 miles from shore.
Now that's what I call war driving!
Ever heard of torpedo tubes?
Mmm, 6% by volume is a strong beer (at least here in the UK), with alcohol resistant yeasts you can get wine with an alcohol content of 14-14.5% though most kick in at around 12-13%. Maybe you were giving a proof figure?
It's a line from 'Ace of Spades' by Motorhead, the finest Heavy Metal band ever to walk the planet. That aside Lemmy is living proof that the human form can survive incredible amounts of abuse over many years, I suppose it's all about building up a tolerance.
Same here in the Uk, I think may favourite was the guy who rang for an ambulance to fetch him a condom because his girlfriend was hot and ready but he'd run out of contraception.....
Personally I don't count the votes to feel smug or vital to the democratic system, I do it because they pay me, it takes a couple of hours finishing about 11 pm. As I'm doing the count for one of the Manchester wards I'm handily placed at the end of Oxford Rd for a few beers and a bop before weaving home happy in a job well done.
Correction to your correction, the people who count the votes in the UK are paid, I know, I've done it a couple of dozen times now.
Thanks, but that was yesterday...........
If they're right, they're right. Which is exactly the problem, you have no way of verifying the accuracy of that count. You're correct that the basic programming algorythm is simple, the difficulty is making it secure, accurate and verifiably so. Open source may help, as you say, Joe Citizen can check the code (whether he knows enough to do so is another matter), but how does he verify that the code he checked is actually what's compiled and running at the polling station.
Every ounce of my concentration was going to these automatic, practically sub-conscious processes
Yeah, it's the complexity of the problem, normally route finding, walking, running etc are automatic, we are highly practised at them. Think back to when you learnt to drive, it took all your concentration. Now the only time when driving needs full concentration is when something out of the ordinary occurs, a tire blows out or someone steps into the road. Those two modes of operation, conscious and automatic, have very different characteristics, conscious processing is highly flexible, it's the learning or creative process and it requires full attention, your 'load average' goes up. Automatic processing however is difficult to modify, it's 'programmed', on the other hand it doesn't add much to your load average. As a problem, running to base camp, becomes more complex than your brain can handle sub-consciously, you switch to conscious processing where you are aware of the problem and the thought processes you use to solve it.
Don't forget his fat wife Sophie.
Oh, Oh, Oh it's a lovely war, who wouldn't be a soldier eh?......
Can I absolutely guarantee my vote went to my choice? No, but I do know it would take a lot of effort to affect the count and get away with it. Each Parliamentary constituency in the UK is made up of a number of wards, in Manchester where I've taken part in the count roughly 5 or 6 wards per constituency. The count for each ward is done by a team of 10 or more people, counting clerks, the returning officer etc, etc. The count is done in full view of the candidates and their representatives who can challenge the procedure at any point. The first count is just to check that the number of ballots in a box matches the number issued at the polling station the box came from. Then the votes are sorted by candidate, then counted per candidate. At the end the total of votes for each candidate (+ spoiled) is checked against the total ballots issued. I'm not saying it would be impossible to mess with the count but it would be difficult, there are so many eyes on the process.
We bug ourselves.
Sounds like it could get addictive, amazing what a little power can do.....
Actually yes, but I obviously wasn't paying attention. More coffee needed methinks.
Ok, make that last 10 or 15 minutes. Honest, there were no comments posted when I first looked.
From reading the article all they've done is strapped the morse codes for A and T together, so it's hardly a great time saver, and if people are exchanging email addresses as per the article it would be pretty obvious from the context what the A and T meant. Unless you were Kemel Ataturk I suppose. Oh, one last thing. ARSE, ARSE, ARSE. If the bloody corporate firewall hadn't sulked for the last 5 minutes I'd have got first post.
You lucky bastard, I'm still waiting for that call, pen, paper and letter next to the phone, form bookmarked and ready to go. Did it feel good? Go on, tell me, tell me, WAS IT GOOD?
You do realize that indulging in independant thought like that could get you into a lot of trouble? Hallmark employ a lot of ex special forces types...
Because she has hay fever and they make her sneeze. Chocolate however.......
So, 'prioritizing packets ensures that a minority of users can't abuse the network resources'. Ok, but surely when you 'prioritize RTP packets' for your phone conversations you are the minority abusing the network? Or is that a little subtle for you?
AAAAGHHH. It's spelt light, lite is the creation of some semi literate PR bunny and we hates it, we hates it. Don't we Precious?
All fair points, but the cumulative effect is to make it that much more difficult to pass counterfeit notes in any quantity. I don't know about the US but here in the Uk you regularly see 10 notes (very roughly equivalent to $20 at the current exchange rate) checked in both shops and pubs.
The rest of the world uses slightly different sizes for different denominations (very handy for the visually impaired), different designs and different colours in those designs. Very cunning........