"In relativistic electromagnetism the recoil force of a railgun should act on the magnetic field and absorb field energy-momentum. The Ampere-Neumann electrodynamics, on the other hand, requires the recoil forces to reside in the railheads and push the rails back toward the gun breach. Experiment confirms the latter mechanism."
I wouldn't call it friction, since the railgun's magnetic. I don't think friction would be much of a problem; I was always under the impression that the slug floated. I do know what your saying though, but it's the huge magnetic forces ripping the barrel apart, not friction.
Do you really think it would ricochet off the ocean? Either way, it would not go any further if it did skip, it wouldn't magically get more speed if it skips, it will lose speed.
(If someone is going to argue angles and such, please read a physics textbook first!)
Well, I don't know about you, but I've thought very hard about what privacy is and why I think it should be considered extremely important in this day and age. My information is my property and I will fight tooth and nail to make sure noone I don't want seeing it gets their money-grabbingpropaganda-spewingindoctrinating hands on it. I'd suggest everyone else does the same, but.... que sera sera. sigh.
Ah, but I didn't sign away my rights did I? If I send you an e-mail and Google reads it, then I might be able to sue you (at least that is the impression I get), and you might get prison time. Also, Google is not "monitoring" it is "reading" quite a gigantically huge difference. It is the difference between the phone company making sure your lines are in working order, and listening in on your conversation. You wouldn't stand for that would you? Google is even worse than that sort of thing. Google is not only listening in on your conversation, but is then apparently going ahead and selling the sorted information it gathers to third parties!!
If I write you an e-mail that says "Don't tell anyone, but I like butt-sex. This message is confidential" 50 times, and then I later I get an e-mail from another party that says "Rush22 How about some buttlove! We know you love it!" Then I obviously could sue you. Someone now knows I love butt-sex, which is essentially the same as you telling them. Note that it does not even matter who I send this e-mail too. I could send it 50 times to anyone, or everyone, and sue each and every user on Google for the maximum $5,000. woot I'm going to be rich!
Anyway, I don't entirely understand it, but the lawyers at EPIC must understand it, and the Attorney General of California thinks it is a big concern, so unless you are a lawyer too, then you can't completely dismiss it.
"California Attorney General Bill Lockyer has acknowledged a letter sent by EPIC, Privacy Rights Clearinghouse, and World Privacy Forum that argued that Google's Gmail service violates the State's strict wiretapping laws. Lockyer wrote (pdf): "The potential exposure of Gmail users to liability for violation of Penal Code section 631 is of particular concern, as are the rights of those who are not subscribers to Gmail but who send e-mail to those who are." Lockyer advised that his office will continue to analyze Gmail and that "I understand your position and share many of your concerns."
(excerpt from the letter)
"IV. It Is Imperative That Google Suspend Gmail Because Users of the Service Could be Civilly and Criminally Liable Under Cal. Pen. Code 631(a)
Section 631(a) specifies that any person who "cause[s] to be done any of the acts or things mentioned above in this section, is punishable by a fine not exceeding two thousand five hundred dollars ($ 2,500), or by imprisonment in the county jail not exceeding one year, or by imprisonment in the state prison, or by both a fine and imprisonment in the county jail or in the state prison." Accordingly, if Google's Gmail violates 631, its users could also be held liable. Private individuals harmed by Gmail users could bring suit under 637.2, which contains a liquidated damages provision of $5,000 per violation."
(and yes I posted something similar under the same heading, but I'm posting it again because there's almost 800 messages and none of them even mention this issue!!)
Methinks ISPs are using "Privacy Concerns" as a way of keeping customers from leaving their quickly aging service. "Hey look, bearded technology pundits with nothing better to do are upset about ads in a radical new free email service. They're waving the privacy flag. We can wave the same flag and lock people in to viewing our contextually inaccurate ads a little bit longer!"
Hi. If it is determined the Google is in violation of 631 of the California Penal Code, users of GMail could be liable for a fine of up to $2,500 or one year in prison. Additionally, private individuals could bring a civil suit of up to $5,000. In other words, if I send you a "g-mail", believing it to be private, and Google reads that mail, I could sue you for $5,000 and you could go to jail.
How's that for privacy concerns?! These laws are on the books, it is just a matter of determining if GMail violates these laws. www.epic.org
"California Attorney General Bill Lockyer has acknowledged a letter sent by EPIC, Privacy Rights Clearinghouse, and World Privacy Forum that argued that Google's Gmail service violates the State's strict wiretapping laws. Lockyer wrote (pdf): "The potential exposure of Gmail users to liability for violation of Penal Code section 631 is of particular concern, as are the rights of those who are not subscribers to Gmail but who send e-mail to those who are." Lockyer advised that his office will continue to analyze Gmail and that "I understand your position and share many of your concerns."
(excerpt from the letter)
"IV. It Is Imperative That Google Suspend Gmail Because Users of the Service Could be Civilly and Criminally Liable Under Cal. Pen. Code 631(a)
Section 631(a) specifies that any person who "cause[s] to be done any of the acts or things mentioned above in this section, is punishable by a fine not exceeding two thousand five hundred dollars ($ 2,500), or by imprisonment in the county jail not exceeding one year, or by imprisonment in the state prison, or by both a fine and imprisonment in the county jail or in the state prison." Accordingly, if Google's Gmail violates 631, its users could also be held liable. Private individuals harmed by Gmail users could bring suit under 637.2, which contains a liquidated damages provision of $5,000 per violation."
You can also get the slightly abridged versions (2.5 hours) read by Stephen Moore (didn't know until today, but he's the voice of Marvin in the BBC series). I actually wore out those little fuzzy dealies in the tapes more than once listening to them. Though I haven't heard any other versions, I would still highly recommend them.:)
"BASIC (standing for Beginner's All Purpose Symbolic Instruction Code) was written (invented) in 1963, at Dartmouth College, by mathematicians John George Kemeny and Tom Kurtzas[sic] as a teaching tool for undergraduates. BASIC has been one of the most commonly used computer programming languages, a simple computer language considered an easy step for students to learn before more powerful languages such as FORTRAN" (Kurtz is the correct spelling)
So the first version of BASIC that was ever written was Dartmouth BASIC and it ran on a GE-265 mainframe (created by General Electric). A bit of trivia: The first BASIC program ran on May 1, 1964 at 4:00 am.
Bill Gates, Paul Allen, and Monte Davidoff wrote a version of the BASIC programming language for the Altair in 1975, which, incidentally, was Microsoft's first product--he went on to produce BASIC interpreters for many different processors.
Apple and Microsoft: The first BASIC for Apple, called Integer BASIC was written by Steve Wozniak. Microsoft offered to sell them their BASIC but Steve Jobs told them they already had one, and if needed, they "could write a better one in a weekend". Apple later needed a floating-point version of BASIC, and since Wozniak was too busy with other projects, they bought Microsoft's floating-point BASIC--it was called Applesoft. As is the standard with Microsoft products, there were initially some bugs, instability, and memory hogging that had to be worked out. Some speculate that if Apple hadn't bought Microsoft's version, Microsoft would have gone under--Apple was able to buy it for a flat fee of $10,500 (and no royalties).
woooo! At first I hated Lingo, but I got used to it eventually. The also don't have Hypertalk (for Hypercard) in there either:/.
I see actionScript on here, but not Lingo (for Macromedia Director). I think there are others missing, too. I guess O'Reilly hasn't published a Lingo book.
....or maybe Lingo is a "liberally biased" programming language?
Slashdot Mirror
"In relativistic electromagnetism the recoil force of a railgun should act on the magnetic field and absorb field energy-momentum. The Ampere-Neumann electrodynamics, on the other hand, requires the recoil forces to reside in the railheads and push the rails back toward the gun breach. Experiment confirms the latter mechanism."
Railgun Recoil and Relativity
(the above is actually the whole article)
All your moon base are belong to the U.S.?
I LOVE QUAKE3 OMFG RAILGUN ROFLMAO 0WN3D!!!
...no, I'm being serious, it is hilarious. Someone make a joke about Punkbuster :D
Cpt: Prepare to fire Redeemer...
Lt: Preparing to fire Sir!
Cpt: Fire!
Lt: Firing!
Cpt: No wait!! ALT fire!! Aaaaaaagh!
I wouldn't call it friction, since the railgun's magnetic. I don't think friction would be much of a problem; I was always under the impression that the slug floated. I do know what your saying though, but it's the huge magnetic forces ripping the barrel apart, not friction.
Here's a thought: What if Snopes is false?
OMG YOU BLEW MY MIND.
As far as Newton is concerned, yep. It would have to bolted to the deck pretty tightly.
Here's a very short description: Railgun recoil and relativity
Do you really think it would ricochet off the ocean? Either way, it would not go any further if it did skip, it wouldn't magically get more speed if it skips, it will lose speed.
(If someone is going to argue angles and such, please read a physics textbook first!)
What's "rest energy"? Also what is "gamma factor"? (also what are the equations?)
Yeah, I think you're right. Google says it does not sell information to third parties, and only uses the information for the GMail account holder.
Gmail and Privacy
Well, I don't know about you, but I've thought very hard about what privacy is and why I think it should be considered extremely important in this day and age. My information is my property and I will fight tooth and nail to make sure noone I don't want seeing it gets their money-grabbing propaganda-spewing indoctrinating hands on it. I'd suggest everyone else does the same, but.... que sera sera. sigh.
Ah, but I didn't sign away my rights did I? If I send you an e-mail and Google reads it, then I might be able to sue you (at least that is the impression I get), and you might get prison time. Also, Google is not "monitoring" it is "reading" quite a gigantically huge difference. It is the difference between the phone company making sure your lines are in working order, and listening in on your conversation. You wouldn't stand for that would you? Google is even worse than that sort of thing. Google is not only listening in on your conversation, but is then apparently going ahead and selling the sorted information it gathers to third parties!!
If I write you an e-mail that says "Don't tell anyone, but I like butt-sex. This message is confidential" 50 times, and then I later I get an e-mail from another party that says "Rush22 How about some buttlove! We know you love it!" Then I obviously could sue you. Someone now knows I love butt-sex, which is essentially the same as you telling them. Note that it does not even matter who I send this e-mail too. I could send it 50 times to anyone, or everyone, and sue each and every user on Google for the maximum $5,000. woot I'm going to be rich!
Anyway, I don't entirely understand it, but the lawyers at EPIC must understand it, and the Attorney General of California thinks it is a big concern, so unless you are a lawyer too, then you can't completely dismiss it.
I'm not feeling left out, please don't give me one. Thanks.
From epic.org
"California Attorney General Bill Lockyer has acknowledged a letter sent by EPIC, Privacy Rights Clearinghouse, and World Privacy Forum that argued that Google's Gmail service violates the State's strict wiretapping laws. Lockyer wrote (pdf): "The potential exposure of Gmail users to liability for violation of Penal Code section 631 is of particular concern, as are the rights of those who are not subscribers to Gmail but who send e-mail to those who are." Lockyer advised that his office will continue to analyze Gmail and that "I understand your position and share many of your concerns."
(excerpt from the letter)
"IV. It Is Imperative That Google Suspend Gmail Because Users of the Service Could be Civilly and Criminally Liable Under Cal. Pen. Code 631(a)
Section 631(a) specifies that any person who "cause[s] to be done any of the acts or things mentioned above in this section, is punishable by a fine not exceeding two thousand five hundred dollars ($ 2,500), or by imprisonment in the county jail not exceeding one year, or by imprisonment in the state prison, or by both a fine and imprisonment in the county jail or in the state prison." Accordingly, if Google's Gmail violates 631, its users could also be held liable. Private individuals harmed by Gmail users could bring suit under 637.2, which contains a liquidated damages provision of $5,000 per violation."
(and yes I posted something similar under the same heading, but I'm posting it again because there's almost 800 messages and none of them even mention this issue!!)
Methinks ISPs are using "Privacy Concerns" as a way of keeping customers from leaving their quickly aging service. "Hey look, bearded technology pundits with nothing better to do are upset about ads in a radical new free email service. They're waving the privacy flag. We can wave the same flag and lock people in to viewing our contextually inaccurate ads a little bit longer!"
Hi. If it is determined the Google is in violation of 631 of the California Penal Code, users of GMail could be liable for a fine of up to $2,500 or one year in prison. Additionally, private individuals could bring a civil suit of up to $5,000 . In other words, if I send you a "g-mail", believing it to be private, and Google reads that mail, I could sue you for $5,000 and you could go to jail.
How's that for privacy concerns?! These laws are on the books, it is just a matter of determining if GMail violates these laws. www.epic.org
That's right, GMail reads your incoming mail and decides what sort of advertising you would like.
From epic.org
"California Attorney General Bill Lockyer has acknowledged a letter sent by EPIC, Privacy Rights Clearinghouse, and World Privacy Forum that argued that Google's Gmail service violates the State's strict wiretapping laws. Lockyer wrote (pdf): "The potential exposure of Gmail users to liability for violation of Penal Code section 631 is of particular concern, as are the rights of those who are not subscribers to Gmail but who send e-mail to those who are." Lockyer advised that his office will continue to analyze Gmail and that "I understand your position and share many of your concerns."
(excerpt from the letter)
"IV. It Is Imperative That Google Suspend Gmail Because Users of the Service Could be Civilly and Criminally Liable Under Cal. Pen. Code 631(a)
Section 631(a) specifies that any person who "cause[s] to be done any of the acts or things mentioned above in this section, is punishable by a fine not exceeding two thousand five hundred dollars ($ 2,500), or by imprisonment in the county jail not exceeding one year, or by imprisonment in the state prison, or by both a fine and imprisonment in the county jail or in the state prison." Accordingly, if Google's Gmail violates 631, its users could also be held liable. Private individuals harmed by Gmail users could bring suit under 637.2, which contains a liquidated damages provision of $5,000 per violation."
ok. clearer still:
(installed) intentionally and without authorization or with intent to injure or defraud
is the same as:
installed with intent to injure, or defraud, or to install without authorization.
You can also get the slightly abridged versions (2.5 hours) read by Stephen Moore (didn't know until today, but he's the voice of Marvin in the BBC series). I actually wore out those little fuzzy dealies in the tapes more than once listening to them. Though I haven't heard any other versions, I would still highly recommend them. :)
Well, it's hard to know how it would be "parsed" but the clues are there to figure it out:
intentionally and without authorization or with intent to injure or defraud (that's what it is right?)
means (intentionally and without authorization) or (with intent to injure or defraud)
A1. Installed intentionally
A2. Has no authorization
= violation
B. Installed with the intent of injuring
= violation
C. Installed with the intent of defrauding
= violation
Authorization does not matter if the intent is to injure or defraud.
IANAL (I am not a lawyer)
=o Javascript?? for what?
what about the Stunt Island programming language, that counts doesn't it? :D
"BASIC (standing for Beginner's All Purpose Symbolic Instruction Code) was written (invented) in 1963, at Dartmouth College, by mathematicians John George Kemeny and Tom Kurtzas[sic] as a teaching tool for undergraduates. BASIC has been one of the most commonly used computer programming languages, a simple computer language considered an easy step for students to learn before more powerful languages such as FORTRAN" (Kurtz is the correct spelling)
s ic.htm
n guage#History (has a big list of dialects)
o ftI
http://inventors.about.com/library/inventors/blba
So the first version of BASIC that was ever written was Dartmouth BASIC and it ran on a GE-265 mainframe (created by General Electric). A bit of trivia: The first BASIC program ran on May 1, 1964 at 4:00 am.
http://www.columbia.edu/~jrh29/kemeny.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BASIC_programming_la
Bill Gates, Paul Allen, and Monte Davidoff wrote a version of the BASIC programming language for the Altair in 1975, which, incidentally, was Microsoft's first product--he went on to produce BASIC interpreters for many different processors.
Apple and Microsoft: The first BASIC for Apple, called Integer BASIC was written by Steve Wozniak. Microsoft offered to sell them their BASIC but Steve Jobs told them they already had one, and if needed, they "could write a better one in a weekend". Apple later needed a floating-point version of BASIC, and since Wozniak was too busy with other projects, they bought Microsoft's floating-point BASIC--it was called Applesoft. As is the standard with Microsoft products, there were initially some bugs, instability, and memory hogging that had to be worked out. Some speculate that if Apple hadn't bought Microsoft's version, Microsoft would have gone under--Apple was able to buy it for a flat fee of $10,500 (and no royalties).
http://apple2history.org/history/ah16.html#Apples
WATCOM Basic - (I think it ran on UNIX)
Applesoft Basic - Apple's Basic for the Apple II series
Integer Basic - Apple's earlier version of Basic which didn't have floating point numbers
woooo! At first I hated Lingo, but I got used to it eventually. The also don't have Hypertalk (for Hypercard) in there either :/.
....or maybe Lingo is a "liberally biased" programming language?
I see actionScript on here, but not Lingo (for Macromedia Director). I think there are others missing, too. I guess O'Reilly hasn't published a Lingo book.