Somewhat off topic, and I ain't no aero engineer either:-)
Transonic is the airspeed regime where parts of the airflow are supersonic and parts are subsonic. Subsonic, all airflow is subsonic; supersonic, it is all supersonic. Due to the shapes of wings, canopies, antennas, whatever, the airflow is not smooth, so for instance the airspeed over the top of the wing is faster than below the wing, and you can get supersonic above, subsonic below.
Zipping thru keeps the stresses and turbulence to a minimum. Like going past Mount Rushmore without telling the kids in the backseat, as opposed to parking the car, getting everyone together, payng for tickets, keeping everybody together, waiting in line,..... all of which is a quite severe test:-)
The entire exercise is to have fun with relative merits reproduced, not anal realism. You go on about water tight compartments; why not fuss and bother over so many other wrongs?
Real battleships seldom fought at less than 10,000 yards (5 miles). These things are fighting at less than a ships length apart! Long range duels involve long delays between aiming/firing and results, plunging fire, precise aiming, radar, haze and good or bad optics, weather conditions, multiple ships and the fog of war. Why not require optics and radar and relays to shore based units to duplicate all these?
Different forms of armor. Real battleships had different thicknesses of armor in different places, at different angles, and different materials. There was side armor, sometimes one armored bulkhead, sometimes several. There was deck armor, sometimes several layers, sometimes a single one. Conning towers, turret armor (which differed on the front, sides, top, and backside, not to mention the barbette), there were magazines, fuel oil to catch on fire, boilers to explode, damage control parties. Heck, throw in crew expertise, training, naval doctrine, individual commander's expertise.
Unrealistic ammunition and guns. Battleship guns usually could fire one or two salvoes a minute, more or less. There were full charges which wore down gun barrels faster, low charges, high explosive vs armor piercing shells, delayed action fuses, duds. The Japanese developed a shell with a better underwater trajectory which got hits which otherwise would have missed. They also had the long range oxygen powered Long Lance torpedo which had the side effect of killing several Japanese cruisers when their torpedo storage was hit in battle.
In short, watertight compartments miss the point. The rules are designed such that small ships have a proportional chance of sinking bigger ships, and that's about it. It's all about reasonably cheap and accurate fun, not about realism down to the nth degree. Once you start worrying about watertight compartments, you are lost. My carrier, USS Midway CV-41, missed WW II by 10 days and would be eligible for these contests. She has 4000 watertight compartments, 12 boiler rooms, 4 engine rooms. How much of that do you want to duplicate?
I am a Unix user, I detest the lack of control WIndows allows, I have had to use it three times in the last 15 years, and I tell you it is NOT intuitive, it is NOT natural, it is NOT easy to use.
How obvious is it that to rename a file you double click on the name?
Visual Studio -- had to use that for a week, just about puked daily, and found three stupdi bugs in the first day (click Add Function, no File.Save mneu so click the X to close the window, click Add Function again, it bitches that some external program has changed the source. Can you say DUMB?)
I won't go on, because I have done my best to forget the experience.
Windows sucks. The ONLY reason people put up with it is that they have been putting up with it for so long. It was a fresh install this last time, W2K, still crashed daily, and don't give me crap about bad hardware -- it previously had Red Hat on it and worked fine.
MicroSoft is locked into their PC single-user single tasking mentality. They have added multi user login and multi tasking, but not mentally, they still have that single user single task mentality, and they have locked themselves into that corner. The very idea that you have to have a GUI to control things is bizarre.
Harry Potter in the book is a spunky little kid, always tweaking his cousin, always getting into trouble, even when it's not intentional. The movie Harry Potter is too damned cautious or timid. I can't imagine him pissing off Dudley even by accident.
The movie left out Hermione's contribution to the final part, and also changed a bunch of it around for no particular reason.
Doesn't Alan Cox live in Wales?
on
Wireless Wales
·
· Score: 2
Is that why? Is this the start of World Domination, spreading like contagion from Wales to the rest of the world?
I believe ESR got booe doff for two reasons. One, the new config required Python. Two, he wanted to change everything at once in ne huge patch, rather than bits and pieces which are easier to understand, back out and correct, and so on.
Here in CA where I am, property owners have NOT paid for their PO boxes in 5 or 10 years. Don't think even renters do. This happened specifically because the residents live too far from the PO for street delivery to be practical, so the free PO box is the substitute. It would probably take several full time employees to wander these dirt roads. This is supposed to be a national policy. Ask about it.
Used to write hardware diagnostics, on VME and Multibus cards in a chassis; one master card, many test cards. Master reported errors over a serial line, and over 15 years the format had gradually changed. Any 24 hour run could have a real stray dog variety of error reports. I needed to analyze the output for patterns, and tried using awk, sed, sort, etc. It was an incredible pain what with all the subtle variations from board to board. After two weeks struggling with awk, sed, sort, I tried Perl, I think Perl 4 at the time, and within a couple of days had learned enough of the language to do the entire job.
I believe I have read that any post office's largest cost is manpower to deliver the mail to individual addresses. This is any post office, and there's not much they can do about it. If they stopped delivering to the 10% hardest addresses, snail mail value would drop dramatically - it could no longer be depended upon to get bills to all customers.
Junk mail does not directly subsidize first class, but it does indirectly, by paying part of the individual delivery charge. The cost of the delivery charge is pretty much the same regardless of how much mail is delivered to each address; they can only walk or drive to so many places in one day. Sorting mail and moving it between post offices is small potatoes compared to deliverying.
The problem is that using non-standard custom tools requires self maintenance. The perl world and CPAN in particular are going to move to Perl 6 sooner or later. Unless I want to back port all that code to Perl 5, I also must move to Perl 6.
Theory be damned. Practice says it's Perl 6 or something else. I choose something else because I don't like change for the sake of change, it makes me wonder what else will break just to be broken, and that is something up with which I shall not put.
Sure, I can write perl 5 forever, but eventually the new CPAN packages will be written for Perl 6, and perl 5 will wither away.
I don't mind most of the changes. I think the regex changes are good, on the whole. I object to change just to cause breakage, like ARGV. There is no other reason for that, except to cause breakage. What else is going to be changed just for the hell of breaking things? If I have to put up with that, I may as well go whole hog, and go to Ruby.
Most of the Perl 6 changes seem to be for the better, but two in particular particularly gall me: changing arrow to dot, and changing ARGV to ARGS.
The rationale for losing arrow was that it made more operators available, and that it was more familiar to users of other OO languages. I suppose it's also easier to type; not only one less character, but no shift key. But it seemed like a change just to force old programs to be rewritten.
And ARGV? Simply because it was supposed to be old fashioned, unfamiliar, not obvious. BAH. Change for no reason other than to commit breakage and force a rewrite.
I will probably switch as time goes by, but to Ruby rather than Perl 6. If I'm going to have to touch every file, I may as well do it the right way.
Joe Sixpack will stop 'em cold
on
CD Copy Stopper
·
· Score: 2
Let those copy protection flags get put in every broadcast by 2006. Let them bring smart card CDs to market. It's all theory to Joe Sixpack now.
But imagine Joe Sixpack needs a new VCR or DVD player in 2006, his is broken, or he gave his to the kids and wants a new one for his home theater. He heads down to Circuit City, picks one up cheap, takes it home, and boom! several days later, discovers he can't record Return Of Seinfeld or Monster Trucks Revealed.
He might try the 800 number. He might bug a friend or two. But he's really going back to Circuit and chew some major ass, especially when he finds EVERYTHING is like that, and he is SOL, and not even his old tapes will play in his new machine. He's going to bring that machine back to Circuit City, he's gonna kick and scream and holler and GET A REFUND.
Won't be long before Circuit City screams and yells at the manufacturers and distributors to take back these returns and stop sending this crippled crap. There will be an unholy immediate instantaneous backlash that will get Congre$$'s attention far faster than RIAA and MPAA cash.
See, it's like M$ and their licensing fiasco. These guys win a few early rounds, buy a few laws and judges, and get greedy. They push the pendulum way too far. DivX didn't teach them a damned thing. Joe Sixpack will.
in which it explains that the hard drive is always encrypted, only the cache is decrypted.
Does anyone know how so many/.ers can read the/. summary, know how inaccurate these summaries are by definition / tradition, and STILL not read the article itself?
You, sir, are yet another bozo here who did not read the article. The hard drive is always encrypted. Only the cache is decrypted; power off and there is no decrypted data anywhere.
RTFA
I used to worry more about fragmentation
on
LWCE Wrapup
·
· Score: 2
These are the same folk who fragmented Unix with all their infighting. But I have since come to the conclusion that it is the GPL which prevents fragmentation. *BSD are just as good in the big picture, yet don't get the press and publicity, and to some extent, don't get the community support. Methinks it is because the BSD license allows proprietary forking, the GPL doesn't. Sometimes I waver a bit and wonder how much personality clashes have to do with it, but there are just as "ownery" ones in the GPL camp. I always come back to the license. Long Live the FSF and GPL!
Seriously. If you can't talk to each other about this, then you are fools to even consider marriage. If you would rather get/. opinions on this than talk it over with the gf, then you aren't ready.
Slashdot Mirror
The very fact that you had to explain who Loreena McKennitt is seems like a pretty good indication that she isn't as famous as you'd like to think....
Not all criminals are politicians...
Somewhat off topic, and I ain't no aero engineer either :-)
..... all of which is a quite severe test :-)
Transonic is the airspeed regime where parts of the airflow are supersonic and parts are subsonic. Subsonic, all airflow is subsonic; supersonic, it is all supersonic. Due to the shapes of wings, canopies, antennas, whatever, the airflow is not smooth, so for instance the airspeed over the top of the wing is faster than below the wing, and you can get supersonic above, subsonic below.
Zipping thru keeps the stresses and turbulence to a minimum. Like going past Mount Rushmore without telling the kids in the backseat, as opposed to parking the car, getting everyone together, payng for tickets, keeping everybody together, waiting in line,
The entire exercise is to have fun with relative merits reproduced, not anal realism. You go on about water tight compartments; why not fuss and bother over so many other wrongs?
Real battleships seldom fought at less than 10,000 yards (5 miles). These things are fighting at less than a ships length apart! Long range duels involve long delays between aiming/firing and results, plunging fire, precise aiming, radar, haze and good or bad optics, weather conditions, multiple ships and the fog of war. Why not require optics and radar and relays to shore based units to duplicate all these?
Different forms of armor. Real battleships had different thicknesses of armor in different places, at different angles, and different materials. There was side armor, sometimes one armored bulkhead, sometimes several. There was deck armor, sometimes several layers, sometimes a single one. Conning towers, turret armor (which differed on the front, sides, top, and backside, not to mention the barbette), there were magazines, fuel oil to catch on fire, boilers to explode, damage control parties. Heck, throw in crew expertise, training, naval doctrine, individual commander's expertise.
Unrealistic ammunition and guns. Battleship guns usually could fire one or two salvoes a minute, more or less. There were full charges which wore down gun barrels faster, low charges, high explosive vs armor piercing shells, delayed action fuses, duds. The Japanese developed a shell with a better underwater trajectory which got hits which otherwise would have missed. They also had the long range oxygen powered Long Lance torpedo which had the side effect of killing several Japanese cruisers when their torpedo storage was hit in battle.
In short, watertight compartments miss the point. The rules are designed such that small ships have a proportional chance of sinking bigger ships, and that's about it. It's all about reasonably cheap and accurate fun, not about realism down to the nth degree. Once you start worrying about watertight compartments, you are lost. My carrier, USS Midway CV-41, missed WW II by 10 days and would be eligible for these contests. She has 4000 watertight compartments, 12 boiler rooms, 4 engine rooms. How much of that do you want to duplicate?
I am a Unix user, I detest the lack of control WIndows allows, I have had to use it three times in the last 15 years, and I tell you it is NOT intuitive, it is NOT natural, it is NOT easy to use.
How obvious is it that to rename a file you double click on the name?
Visual Studio -- had to use that for a week, just about puked daily, and found three stupdi bugs in the first day (click Add Function, no File.Save mneu so click the X to close the window, click Add Function again, it bitches that some external program has changed the source. Can you say DUMB?)
I won't go on, because I have done my best to forget the experience.
Windows sucks. The ONLY reason people put up with it is that they have been putting up with it for so long. It was a fresh install this last time, W2K, still crashed daily, and don't give me crap about bad hardware -- it previously had Red Hat on it and worked fine.
MicroSoft is locked into their PC single-user single tasking mentality. They have added multi user login and multi tasking, but not mentally, they still have that single user single task mentality, and they have locked themselves into that corner. The very idea that you have to have a GUI to control things is bizarre.
... so mod whores, here ya go :-)
Harry Potter in the book is a spunky little kid, always tweaking his cousin, always getting into trouble, even when it's not intentional. The movie Harry Potter is too damned cautious or timid. I can't imagine him pissing off Dudley even by accident.
The movie left out Hermione's contribution to the final part, and also changed a bunch of it around for no particular reason.
Is that why? Is this the start of World Domination, spreading like contagion from Wales to the rest of the world?
I even have a plugin loaded the checks my out-going messages(sic) spelling.
That's what always galled me, the fact that Linux / BSD / ABM couldn't use them.
I believe ESR got booe doff for two reasons. One, the new config required Python. Two, he wanted to change everything at once in ne huge patch, rather than bits and pieces which are easier to understand, back out and correct, and so on.
Here in CA where I am, property owners have NOT paid for their PO boxes in 5 or 10 years. Don't think even renters do. This happened specifically because the residents live too far from the PO for street delivery to be practical, so the free PO box is the substitute. It would probably take several full time employees to wander these dirt roads. This is supposed to be a national policy. Ask about it.
Used to write hardware diagnostics, on VME and Multibus cards in a chassis; one master card, many test cards. Master reported errors over a serial line, and over 15 years the format had gradually changed. Any 24 hour run could have a real stray dog variety of error reports. I needed to analyze the output for patterns, and tried using awk, sed, sort, etc. It was an incredible pain what with all the subtle variations from board to board. After two weeks struggling with awk, sed, sort, I tried Perl, I think Perl 4 at the time, and within a couple of days had learned enough of the language to do the entire job.
I believe I have read that any post office's largest cost is manpower to deliver the mail to individual addresses. This is any post office, and there's not much they can do about it. If they stopped delivering to the 10% hardest addresses, snail mail value would drop dramatically - it could no longer be depended upon to get bills to all customers.
Junk mail does not directly subsidize first class, but it does indirectly, by paying part of the individual delivery charge. The cost of the delivery charge is pretty much the same regardless of how much mail is delivered to each address; they can only walk or drive to so many places in one day. Sorting mail and moving it between post offices is small potatoes compared to deliverying.
The problem is that using non-standard custom tools requires self maintenance. The perl world and CPAN in particular are going to move to Perl 6 sooner or later. Unless I want to back port all that code to Perl 5, I also must move to Perl 6.
Theory be damned. Practice says it's Perl 6 or something else. I choose something else because I don't like change for the sake of change, it makes me wonder what else will break just to be broken, and that is something up with which I shall not put.
Sure, I can write perl 5 forever, but eventually the new CPAN packages will be written for Perl 6, and perl 5 will wither away.
I don't mind most of the changes. I think the regex changes are good, on the whole. I object to change just to cause breakage, like ARGV. There is no other reason for that, except to cause breakage. What else is going to be changed just for the hell of breaking things? If I have to put up with that, I may as well go whole hog, and go to Ruby.
Most of the Perl 6 changes seem to be for the better, but two in particular particularly gall me: changing arrow to dot, and changing ARGV to ARGS.
The rationale for losing arrow was that it made more operators available, and that it was more familiar to users of other OO languages. I suppose it's also easier to type; not only one less character, but no shift key. But it seemed like a change just to force old programs to be rewritten.
And ARGV? Simply because it was supposed to be old fashioned, unfamiliar, not obvious. BAH. Change for no reason other than to commit breakage and force a rewrite.
I will probably switch as time goes by, but to Ruby rather than Perl 6. If I'm going to have to touch every file, I may as well do it the right way.
Let those copy protection flags get put in every broadcast by 2006. Let them bring smart card CDs to market. It's all theory to Joe Sixpack now.
But imagine Joe Sixpack needs a new VCR or DVD player in 2006, his is broken, or he gave his to the kids and wants a new one for his home theater. He heads down to Circuit City, picks one up cheap, takes it home, and boom! several days later, discovers he can't record Return Of Seinfeld or Monster Trucks Revealed.
He might try the 800 number. He might bug a friend or two. But he's really going back to Circuit and chew some major ass, especially when he finds EVERYTHING is like that, and he is SOL, and not even his old tapes will play in his new machine. He's going to bring that machine back to Circuit City, he's gonna kick and scream and holler and GET A REFUND.
Won't be long before Circuit City screams and yells at the manufacturers and distributors to take back these returns and stop sending this crippled crap. There will be an unholy immediate instantaneous backlash that will get Congre$$'s attention far faster than RIAA and MPAA cash.
See, it's like M$ and their licensing fiasco. These guys win a few early rounds, buy a few laws and judges, and get greedy. They push the pendulum way too far. DivX didn't teach them a damned thing. Joe Sixpack will.
What's all this we business? Is someone taking your money to do this?
Face it buddy, not everything in the world is done to your whim. If somebody else wants to spend their money on this, it none of your business.
No need for hitech when a simple mail order from a chemical lab will do the trick.
in which it explains that the hard drive is always encrypted, only the cache is decrypted.
/.ers can read the /. summary, know how inaccurate these summaries are by definition / tradition, and STILL not read the article itself?
Does anyone know how so many
Read the fscking article. The hard drive is always encrypted. The cache is decrypted.
I swear this is one of the worst articles for write-only idiots.
Ought to be a damned moderator choice for that.
You, sir, are yet another bozo here who did not read the article. The hard drive is always encrypted. Only the cache is decrypted; power off and there is no decrypted data anywhere.
RTFA
These are the same folk who fragmented Unix with all their infighting. But I have since come to the conclusion that it is the GPL which prevents fragmentation. *BSD are just as good in the big picture, yet don't get the press and publicity, and to some extent, don't get the community support. Methinks it is because the BSD license allows proprietary forking, the GPL doesn't. Sometimes I waver a bit and wonder how much personality clashes have to do with it, but there are just as "ownery" ones in the GPL camp. I always come back to the license. Long Live the FSF and GPL!
This is a mouse which requires no surface. It uses gyros. The question of optical vs mechanical does not arrive.
Seriously. If you can't talk to each other about this, then you are fools to even consider marriage. If you would rather get /. opinions on this than talk it over with the gf, then you aren't ready.