No need to worry. Nobody really questions Russian leadership in modern space tech. Virtually every US achievement in that area I can think of is basically a repeat of some Soviet ahievement from like 50 years before.
False. They are not "reconditioned". They are essentially rebuilt from scratch by the Aerojet with the major participation of Ukrainian "Yuzhnoe" design bureau. The mere fact that the entire fuel supply system ifs prvided by Ukrainians immediately requires a full rebuild. And, of course, the fact that the engine failed today is already a direct factual indication that this was not a Russian engine.
You are confused. Russian rockets are not designs from the 60s. By the average standards of the modern space technology, Russian space hardware ranks as 2040 design. I know that sounds strange, but USA and everyone else is so far behind Russia in that department that we have no chice but to consider Russian deisgns way ahead of the current time just to balance things right.
These people are not inventors of the blue LED. This specific kind of blue LED was invented in Soviet Union in the 1960's by the team of Zhores I. Alferov (the winner of 2000 Nobel Prize in Physics). Nobody disputes the priority on the invention itself.
After that the issue was to develop the manufacturing process that would make the mass-production of such blue LEDs feasible. The Japanese team did exactly that: they came up with the technology that allows one to mass-manufacture the Alferov's device cheaply.
There's no dedicated feature in C language that makes specifically `if (a = b)` possible. Your `if (a = b)` example is just a side effect of the fact that `=` operator in C behaves just like any other operator: it has a result and it can have side-effects. This is perfectly logical and useful way to design an operator.
You decided to make an `if` that depends on the result of `=` operator? Yeah, you can do that in C, but if you don't like it - it is your fault. Don't like it? Don't do it! Blaming it on the language is like hitting your thumb with a hammer and then blaming it on hammers.
`sizeof(string)` never "returns the length of a single byte".
`sizeof(string)` evaluates to the byte-size of `string` object. E.g. it evaluates to the full size of the character array, if `string` is a character array. Or it evaluates to the byte-size of a pointer, if `string` is a pointer.
It should not be too difficult to find a Russian-speaking person, who can read the Putin's speech in the original language and confirm that nothing like that was ever said by Putin. This is not even a "loose and creative" interpretation, this is a total and complete hoax. Propaganda writers of the US regime were working in DDoS mode for the last few months, pumping out copious amounts of uninspired garbage-quality nonsense. This specific piece of nonsense does not stand out in any way. Why is it suddenly here?
Imagine that you drew an Euclidean triangle on a piece of paper, measured its internal angles and calculated their sum. And suddenly you obtained 185 degrees as the result! What do you do in such case?
A) Assume that your measurements and/or calculations contain an error B) Declare to the world that you found an triangle that tops the list of all Euclidean triangles known to man in therms of the internal angle sum.
I hope you have enough scientific literacy to realize that A is the correct answer.
The authors of the above research apparently belong to that peculiar group of people who chose B in cases like that. Sorry, geniuses, when you end up in situations when Canada tops your "list of most science-literate countries", you go back, review your research and find where you screwed up.
The most science-literate countries in the world are Russia and Belarus. Every time you obtain a different result, you just throw your "research methodology" into the garbage can and start over. Yes, it is a s simple as that. Class dismissed.
They are being let go in the real life. But what is going to happen to their characters in the show universe? Are they getting killed off? I suggest a gruesome industrial accident.
No, you don't have "a Ford with adaptive steering". No Ford was ever made with the feature in question. Ford is just thinking about introducing it.
You have a Ford with variable amount of steering boost. This has been around forever, even in hydraulic systems. But this is not adaptive steering discussed here. Adaptive steering requires variable steering ratio. Your Ford does not have variable steering ratio.
Despite the fact that such systems break the sold mechanical link between the steering wheel and the steering rack, they are normally rather well protected from mechanical failures. At least Honda's and BMW's systems will normally "fuse" steering shaft in case of any mechanical component disintegration, restoring the classic solid steering link.
However, such systems are very susceptible to software failures and simple electrical failures (like water getting into electronics), when the systems "gets a mind of its own" and begins to steer the car overriding driver's input. There is an epic thread on e90post (now sanitized) about consequences of such failure in a E92 car
http://www.e90post.com/forums/...
Firstly, BMW cars with AS systems in them have notoriously bad steering feel. Secondly, BMW has abandoned AS in favor of ordinary electric boosters. So, it looks like at least someone at BMW decided that this tech is not gonna fly.
False.
Electric boosters ("power steering") systems have been quite widely used for a while already. However, in this case they are talking about something totally different: ratio-changing and self-steering systems. So far only Honda used it in Japanese market and BMW used exactly the same system (as an optional feature) everywhere. Lexus also has its own a ratio-changing system, implemented differently.
Overall, such systems are rather rare and typically offered as an option. It is not correct to say that anyone "switched" to anything like that.
This system was first introduced by Honda in the their JDM S2000. It was later copied by BMW as their "Active Steering" system and offered in USA in 5-series and 3-series cars. Note that such systems effectively break the solid link between the steering wheel and the steering rack. There were a number of reports of Active Steering failures in 3-series BMW E9x cars. BMW abandoned the system for in new 3-series, replacing of with ordinary electric booster without ratio-changing ability.
NASA apparently is trying to erect sanctions against NASA.
Most of the US space and military heavy hauling was done by Volga-Dnepr An-124. It used to make its final approach to Moffett field right over my head. I guess we'll no longer see it. I wonder what NASA is going to do to replace it. Slice the cargo into smaller chunks and make more trips?
Lats time I checked, American Nazis were carrying out military training exercises in mock-ups of Russian cities they purposely built. Why wouldn't Iran military want to build a mock-up of American aircraft carrier for the very same purposes? Most likely this is indeed a Target Barge, exactly what the simpletons in the Fifth Fleet suggested, except that they lack the intelligence to understand that the joke is actually on them.
Huh?
Read the original post: "...SBU confirmed March 16 the arrest of a group of Russians...". Read the Forbes text: some guy allegedly made some baseless allegations, perfectly aligned with the established baseline propaganda level and thematics of the Ukraininan "internet warriors" and their handlers.
This passage takes the cookie "Putin’s subversive forces will also gin up neo-Nazi incidents with Nazi regalia and Swastikas on full display." So, that was Putin's spetsnaz that threw Molotov cocktails at Berkut and exprlled Yanukovich from the country! LOL!
But back to the topic. Arrest of a group of Russian spetsnaz. Where is it in the Forbes link? Please, elighten me.
He added links "to Forbes" you say? Why didn't he also add links to Fox, Huffington and MacDonalds and as well? Nothing at the link to Forbes says anything even remotely similar to what the post is alleging (I didn't even bother to check the other ones).
Excuse me, this is Slashdot, not Reddit or News of the World. Would you please keep the most obvious propaganda bullshit out of Slashdot? Every time you want to post a topic like "A woman gave birth to a six headed horse", "Intelligent peanut butter consumed a cat" or "Russian spetsnaz is planting explosives in Ukraine", consider a more appropriate site.
There's no system that would transmit anything from the engines as part of "routine maintenance and monitoring program". The whole story is a hoax, most likely fabricated by someone at WSJ. I won't be surprised to find out it was a prank by some junior WSJ employee.
The whole idea that engines would somehow know "altitude and speed of the jet" is ridiculous at best. Altitude, speed and other parameters are important for controlling the engine, but they are always collected by independent sensors installed in airplane itself. And engine control decisions are made by electronics hosted separately in the airframe, not in the engine itself. Engines have no self-sufficient decision-making control circuitry, let alone any active data transmission capabilities.
Firstly, you are still missing the main point. The "grandparent poster" is factually incorrect in his/her assertion that parenthesis is optional and was added just to camouflage the modification. You simply don't get to side with that poster, regardless of whether you want it or not. The option is simply not on the table, period. The parenthesis is not optional in this case, so the matter of whether the malicious coder was thinking about using it to better hide the change is completely moot. Whatever they were thinking does not matter, since the compiler would force them to add the parenthesis anyway.
Secondly, I suggest you look through a few Linux source code files and observe the styling conventions they use here. You will find massive amount of formally superfluous parenthesis usage in expressions like (a == b) && (c < d). Do you really suggest that this was done by hordes of malicious coders trying to hide something?
Well, firstly, in C it is allowable to use assignments (and other operators with side-effects) within any expression, not just inside "condition tests". Expression in condition tests do not receive any special treatment.
Secondly, the whole purpose of expression statements in C is their side-effects, since the result of the full expression in such statement is always ignored. Taking that into account, it becomes obvious that prohibiting side-effects in C expressions would have made these expression completely unusable.
Er... You do realize now that there has never been any "hackers", do you? The whole concept of "hackers" was nothing more than a smoke screen invented by NSA for the sole purpose of creating FUD in situations like this one. Hollywood picked it up and ran with it (maybe on their own accord, or maybe after receiving a few of offers they could not refuse), so the idea of a "hacker" eventually became a part of pop-culture. But it no "hackers" ever actually existed in real life. It is time to wake up, it is 2013 already.
Slashdot Mirror
No need to worry. Nobody really questions Russian leadership in modern space tech. Virtually every US achievement in that area I can think of is basically a repeat of some Soviet ahievement from like 50 years before.
False. They are not "reconditioned". They are essentially rebuilt from scratch by the Aerojet with the major participation of Ukrainian "Yuzhnoe" design bureau. The mere fact that the entire fuel supply system ifs prvided by Ukrainians immediately requires a full rebuild. And, of course, the fact that the engine failed today is already a direct factual indication that this was not a Russian engine.
You are confused. Russian rockets are not designs from the 60s. By the average standards of the modern space technology, Russian space hardware ranks as 2040 design. I know that sounds strange, but USA and everyone else is so far behind Russia in that department that we have no chice but to consider Russian deisgns way ahead of the current time just to balance things right.
These people are not inventors of the blue LED. This specific kind of blue LED was invented in Soviet Union in the 1960's by the team of Zhores I. Alferov (the winner of 2000 Nobel Prize in Physics). Nobody disputes the priority on the invention itself.
After that the issue was to develop the manufacturing process that would make the mass-production of such blue LEDs feasible. The Japanese team did exactly that: they came up with the technology that allows one to mass-manufacture the Alferov's device cheaply.
Well, it is your fault entirely. Real C programmers know how to write C programs without using `;` at all. Here's an example for you
int main()
{
if (puts("Hello World!")) {}
}
See?
There's no dedicated feature in C language that makes specifically `if (a = b)` possible. Your `if (a = b)` example is just a side effect of the fact that `=` operator in C behaves just like any other operator: it has a result and it can have side-effects. This is perfectly logical and useful way to design an operator.
You decided to make an `if` that depends on the result of `=` operator? Yeah, you can do that in C, but if you don't like it - it is your fault. Don't like it? Don't do it! Blaming it on the language is like hitting your thumb with a hammer and then blaming it on hammers.
`sizeof(string)` never "returns the length of a single byte".
`sizeof(string)` evaluates to the byte-size of `string` object. E.g. it evaluates to the full size of the character array, if `string` is a character array. Or it evaluates to the byte-size of a pointer, if `string` is a pointer.
It should not be too difficult to find a Russian-speaking person, who can read the Putin's speech in the original language and confirm that nothing like that was ever said by Putin. This is not even a "loose and creative" interpretation, this is a total and complete hoax. Propaganda writers of the US regime were working in DDoS mode for the last few months, pumping out copious amounts of uninspired garbage-quality nonsense. This specific piece of nonsense does not stand out in any way. Why is it suddenly here?
Imagine that you drew an Euclidean triangle on a piece of paper, measured its internal angles and calculated their sum. And suddenly you obtained 185 degrees as the result! What do you do in such case?
A) Assume that your measurements and/or calculations contain an error
B) Declare to the world that you found an triangle that tops the list of all Euclidean triangles known to man in therms of the internal angle sum.
I hope you have enough scientific literacy to realize that A is the correct answer.
The authors of the above research apparently belong to that peculiar group of people who chose B in cases like that. Sorry, geniuses, when you end up in situations when Canada tops your "list of most science-literate countries", you go back, review your research and find where you screwed up.
The most science-literate countries in the world are Russia and Belarus. Every time you obtain a different result, you just throw your "research methodology" into the garbage can and start over. Yes, it is a s simple as that. Class dismissed.
P.S. LOL! Canada...
They are being let go in the real life. But what is going to happen to their characters in the show universe? Are they getting killed off? I suggest a gruesome industrial accident.
No, you don't have "a Ford with adaptive steering". No Ford was ever made with the feature in question. Ford is just thinking about introducing it. You have a Ford with variable amount of steering boost. This has been around forever, even in hydraulic systems. But this is not adaptive steering discussed here. Adaptive steering requires variable steering ratio. Your Ford does not have variable steering ratio.
Despite the fact that such systems break the sold mechanical link between the steering wheel and the steering rack, they are normally rather well protected from mechanical failures. At least Honda's and BMW's systems will normally "fuse" steering shaft in case of any mechanical component disintegration, restoring the classic solid steering link. However, such systems are very susceptible to software failures and simple electrical failures (like water getting into electronics), when the systems "gets a mind of its own" and begins to steer the car overriding driver's input. There is an epic thread on e90post (now sanitized) about consequences of such failure in a E92 car http://www.e90post.com/forums/...
Firstly, BMW cars with AS systems in them have notoriously bad steering feel. Secondly, BMW has abandoned AS in favor of ordinary electric boosters. So, it looks like at least someone at BMW decided that this tech is not gonna fly.
False. Electric boosters ("power steering") systems have been quite widely used for a while already. However, in this case they are talking about something totally different: ratio-changing and self-steering systems. So far only Honda used it in Japanese market and BMW used exactly the same system (as an optional feature) everywhere. Lexus also has its own a ratio-changing system, implemented differently. Overall, such systems are rather rare and typically offered as an option. It is not correct to say that anyone "switched" to anything like that.
This system was first introduced by Honda in the their JDM S2000. It was later copied by BMW as their "Active Steering" system and offered in USA in 5-series and 3-series cars. Note that such systems effectively break the solid link between the steering wheel and the steering rack. There were a number of reports of Active Steering failures in 3-series BMW E9x cars. BMW abandoned the system for in new 3-series, replacing of with ordinary electric booster without ratio-changing ability.
NASA apparently is trying to erect sanctions against NASA. Most of the US space and military heavy hauling was done by Volga-Dnepr An-124. It used to make its final approach to Moffett field right over my head. I guess we'll no longer see it. I wonder what NASA is going to do to replace it. Slice the cargo into smaller chunks and make more trips?
Lats time I checked, American Nazis were carrying out military training exercises in mock-ups of Russian cities they purposely built. Why wouldn't Iran military want to build a mock-up of American aircraft carrier for the very same purposes? Most likely this is indeed a Target Barge, exactly what the simpletons in the Fifth Fleet suggested, except that they lack the intelligence to understand that the joke is actually on them.
Huh? Read the original post: "...SBU confirmed March 16 the arrest of a group of Russians...". Read the Forbes text: some guy allegedly made some baseless allegations, perfectly aligned with the established baseline propaganda level and thematics of the Ukraininan "internet warriors" and their handlers. This passage takes the cookie "Putin’s subversive forces will also gin up neo-Nazi incidents with Nazi regalia and Swastikas on full display." So, that was Putin's spetsnaz that threw Molotov cocktails at Berkut and exprlled Yanukovich from the country! LOL! But back to the topic. Arrest of a group of Russian spetsnaz. Where is it in the Forbes link? Please, elighten me.
He added links "to Forbes" you say? Why didn't he also add links to Fox, Huffington and MacDonalds and as well? Nothing at the link to Forbes says anything even remotely similar to what the post is alleging (I didn't even bother to check the other ones).
Excuse me, this is Slashdot, not Reddit or News of the World. Would you please keep the most obvious propaganda bullshit out of Slashdot? Every time you want to post a topic like "A woman gave birth to a six headed horse", "Intelligent peanut butter consumed a cat" or "Russian spetsnaz is planting explosives in Ukraine", consider a more appropriate site.
"What happened to Helios 522" would not turn off transponders.
There's no system that would transmit anything from the engines as part of "routine maintenance and monitoring program". The whole story is a hoax, most likely fabricated by someone at WSJ. I won't be surprised to find out it was a prank by some junior WSJ employee. The whole idea that engines would somehow know "altitude and speed of the jet" is ridiculous at best. Altitude, speed and other parameters are important for controlling the engine, but they are always collected by independent sensors installed in airplane itself. And engine control decisions are made by electronics hosted separately in the airframe, not in the engine itself. Engines have no self-sufficient decision-making control circuitry, let alone any active data transmission capabilities.
Firstly, you are still missing the main point. The "grandparent poster" is factually incorrect in his/her assertion that parenthesis is optional and was added just to camouflage the modification. You simply don't get to side with that poster, regardless of whether you want it or not. The option is simply not on the table, period. The parenthesis is not optional in this case, so the matter of whether the malicious coder was thinking about using it to better hide the change is completely moot. Whatever they were thinking does not matter, since the compiler would force them to add the parenthesis anyway.
Secondly, I suggest you look through a few Linux source code files and observe the styling conventions they use here. You will find massive amount of formally superfluous parenthesis usage in expressions like (a == b) && (c < d). Do you really suggest that this was done by hordes of malicious coders trying to hide something?
Well, firstly, in C it is allowable to use assignments (and other operators with side-effects) within any expression, not just inside "condition tests". Expression in condition tests do not receive any special treatment. Secondly, the whole purpose of expression statements in C is their side-effects, since the result of the full expression in such statement is always ignored. Taking that into account, it becomes obvious that prohibiting side-effects in C expressions would have made these expression completely unusable.
Er... You do realize now that there has never been any "hackers", do you? The whole concept of "hackers" was nothing more than a smoke screen invented by NSA for the sole purpose of creating FUD in situations like this one. Hollywood picked it up and ran with it (maybe on their own accord, or maybe after receiving a few of offers they could not refuse), so the idea of a "hacker" eventually became a part of pop-culture. But it no "hackers" ever actually existed in real life. It is time to wake up, it is 2013 already.