That's right, be old school and have a HD in your pocket which you can drop and lose all your shit (because we know you don't have backups) and lose the cost of the device itself.
A lot of people sneered at Opera Unite, calling it bloat.
To this day this derision of Unite by various people still bugs me, because under Unite, you could have an instant server on any computer that could run Unite. It was simple and drool proof. You didn't even need dyndns services. No more rolling your own with Apache or some other web sever. You could have it up and running within 3 minutes of downloading Opera. Maybe even less if you typed fast.
Rip your music from CD and file away your CD just like in your scenario, then anywhere on the Earth, you could listen to your streaming media player or access the music files directly. Unite gave you the ability to do ad-hoc file serving, www, chat, etc, through plugins and made it as easy as falling off a log. Unite involved none of this third-party cloud services bullshit. You basically created your own "cloud" with Opera Unite, and the Opera Unite servers simply pointed to your own machine(s).
Unite resurrected the two-way-street that was the Internet before the media companies turned it into a media-consumption tool.
But as of Opera 12, all this is all gone because it wasn't adopted as Opera had hoped, which is a shame, because this was a brilliant resource. I don't see any true replacements for it. Sure, I can roll my own, but it's not the same instant gratification and configuring separate services is not something I can recommend to complete newbies.
In order for a "me too" product to succeed in a marketplace full of similar products and establish itself as the new leader, it has to be twice as good as the current market leader.
None of Microsoft's "me too" products over the last 10 years have done this. Not even the xbox which comes in a distant second to the Wii as of June 30. Should anyone dispute that, because I know there are a lot of fanboys here:
Worldwide Sales Figures Wii -- 96.56 million as of 30 June 2012[8] Xbox 360 -- 67.2 million as of 31 March 2012[52] PlayStation 3 -- 63.9 million as of 31 March 2012[53] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Console_wars
All the previous Microsoft phone OSes have been market disasters, taking single-digit slices of the market pie. Mostly because they sucked outright.
Is WP 8 twice as good as Android or iOS or even Symbian? No. It's just another "me too" smartphone OS barely even with the others. Is the smartphone hardware from Nokia twice as good as the hardware from Apple or Samsung? The days of Nokia producing a superior product compared to its competitors are long gone.
The only way for a fair-to-middling product to succeed in a market already dominated by others is to "choke off the oxygen" of one of the competitors. But while this strategy may have been successful in the past, Microsoft doesn't seem to be able to cut off anyone's oxygen these days except when they teamkill one of their partners in the head.
So why does Ballmer and Microsoft think it deserves the top spot?
And anyone who puts a question in the headline deserves a ripened pine cone up the ass.
As seen on Facebook, there are a lot of shit comments even under real names.
The real names meme is not about improving comment quality, but rather it is a direct attack on anonymity as a right. There are busybodies, government officials, corporatists, etc, that think that the right to anonymity should be abolished. Doing it online is a quick way of getting people to accept it offline.
And then comes the turnkey police state, whether intended or not.
The US used to be the land of second chances. It is quickly becoming the land of no chance, and people like ESR are helping this along gleefully, because people with the name "sexygirl69" offend him.
Sorry to correct you, but the F1 did bounce around all over the place until they found the correct pattern of holes in the injection plate.
This they did by blowing up a lot of engines, and when they did finally find the correct plate, they tested instability by putting an explosive charge and detonating it inside the combustion chamber while the engine was running. The F1 self-stabilized with the correct plate, within 1/10th of a second.
After the disappointing, and frankly insulting performance put on by Matt Lauer and Meredith Viera (who I watched while growing up as local TV personalities) and the execrable Ryan Seacrest interviewing Michael Phelps instead of showing the 7/7 memorial, and the NOT EVEN 5 MINUTES BETWEEN COMMERCIALS, I'm done with the Olympics for this go-round.
The F1 was designed in 1959. The F1A is an improved version, which is what we're really talking about.
And the F1A has these stats:
Rocketdyne Lox/Kerosene rocket engine. 9189.6 kN. Study 1968. Designed for booster applications. Gas generator, pump-fed. Isp=310s.
Thrust (sl): 8,003.800 kN (1,799,326 lbf). Thrust (sl): 816,178 kgf. Engine: 8,098 kg (17,853 lb). Chamber Pressure: 70.00 bar. Area Ratio: 16. Propellant Formulation: Lox/RP-1. Thrust to Weight Ratio: 115.71.
Status: Study 1968. Unfuelled mass: 8,098 kg (17,853 lb). Height: 5.48 m (17.97 ft). Diameter: 3.61 m (11.84 ft). Thrust: 9,189.60 kN (2,065,904 lbf). Specific impulse: 310 s. Specific impulse sea level: 270 s. Burn time: 158 s. First Launch: 1967.
Chambers: 4. Thrust (sl): 7,550.000 kN (1,697,300 lbf). Thrust (sl): 769,876 kgf. Engine: 9,750 kg (21,490 lb). Chamber Pressure: 245.00 bar. Area Ratio: 36.87. Thrust to Weight Ratio: 82.66. Oxidizer to Fuel Ratio: 2.6.
AKA: 11D520. Status: Development ended 1976. Unfuelled mass: 9,750 kg (21,490 lb). Height: 3.78 m (12.40 ft). Diameter: 4.02 m (13.17 ft). Thrust: 7,903.00 kN (1,776,665 lbf). Specific impulse: 337 s. Specific impulse sea level: 309 s. Burn time: 150 s. First Launch: 1981-93. Number: 12 .
Yeahbut....we wouldn't be basing the new F-1 type engine on the original F-1, we'd be using the F-1A.
The F-1A has 33 percent more thrust than the F-1.
9,189.60 kN for the F-1A versus 7,887 kN for the RD-171
But here is where the real difference comes in:
Lox/RP-1. Thrust to Weight Ratio: 115.71. for the F-1A
It's 82 for your Russian motor. Thus the advantage of using one combustion chamber compared to using 4.
Modern materials should lighten the F-1A and modern controls should improve efficiency and thrust even more to improve the thrust to weight ratio.
Why the Russians never use large combustion chambers and why you see 4 of them on the RD-171: They never solved the problem of combustion instability beyond a certain size. We did.
Because it's the largest liquid fueled engine in existence, and it works. Nobody has anything comparable to it, not even the Russians. There's a reason why the Russians use so many smaller engines.
Why design from scratch when you have known working prototypes? Only fools reinvent the wheel. Indeed, going back and redesigning the "shower head" fuel injection plate would be just nuts as it works fabulously.
A lighter, more efficient F-1A would be really, really sweet.
Slashdot Mirror
That's right, be old school and have a HD in your pocket which you can drop and lose all your shit (because we know you don't have backups) and lose the cost of the device itself.
A lot of people sneered at Opera Unite, calling it bloat.
To this day this derision of Unite by various people still bugs me, because under Unite, you could have an instant server on any computer that could run Unite. It was simple and drool proof. You didn't even need dyndns services. No more rolling your own with Apache or some other web sever. You could have it up and running within 3 minutes of downloading Opera. Maybe even less if you typed fast.
Rip your music from CD and file away your CD just like in your scenario, then anywhere on the Earth, you could listen to your streaming media player or access the music files directly. Unite gave you the ability to do ad-hoc file serving, www, chat, etc, through plugins and made it as easy as falling off a log. Unite involved none of this third-party cloud services bullshit. You basically created your own "cloud" with Opera Unite, and the Opera Unite servers simply pointed to your own machine(s).
Unite resurrected the two-way-street that was the Internet before the media companies turned it into a media-consumption tool.
But as of Opera 12, all this is all gone because it wasn't adopted as Opera had hoped, which is a shame, because this was a brilliant resource. I don't see any true replacements for it. Sure, I can roll my own, but it's not the same instant gratification and configuring separate services is not something I can recommend to complete newbies.
--
BMO
Indeed.
In order for a "me too" product to succeed in a marketplace full of similar products and establish itself as the new leader, it has to be twice as good as the current market leader.
None of Microsoft's "me too" products over the last 10 years have done this. Not even the xbox which comes in a distant second to the Wii as of June 30. Should anyone dispute that, because I know there are a lot of fanboys here:
All the previous Microsoft phone OSes have been market disasters, taking single-digit slices of the market pie. Mostly because they sucked outright.
Is WP 8 twice as good as Android or iOS or even Symbian? No. It's just another "me too" smartphone OS barely even with the others. Is the smartphone hardware from Nokia twice as good as the hardware from Apple or Samsung? The days of Nokia producing a superior product compared to its competitors are long gone.
The only way for a fair-to-middling product to succeed in a market already dominated by others is to "choke off the oxygen" of one of the competitors. But while this strategy may have been successful in the past, Microsoft doesn't seem to be able to cut off anyone's oxygen these days except when they teamkill one of their partners in the head.
So why does Ballmer and Microsoft think it deserves the top spot?
And anyone who puts a question in the headline deserves a ripened pine cone up the ass.
--
BMO
I'm going to hold a seance to summon the ghost of Jim McKay to haunt the NBC execs and ask them repeatedly "have you no shame?"
--
BMO
Hello my friend, how are you today?
--
BMO
As seen on Facebook, there are a lot of shit comments even under real names.
The real names meme is not about improving comment quality, but rather it is a direct attack on anonymity as a right. There are busybodies, government officials, corporatists, etc, that think that the right to anonymity should be abolished. Doing it online is a quick way of getting people to accept it offline.
And then comes the turnkey police state, whether intended or not.
The US used to be the land of second chances. It is quickly becoming the land of no chance, and people like ESR are helping this along gleefully, because people with the name "sexygirl69" offend him.
--
BMO
I mentioned in another post that I saw the Nagano Olympics from Canada, specifically while staying in Peterborough, Ontario.
--
BMO
Sorry to correct you, but the F1 did bounce around all over the place until they found the correct pattern of holes in the injection plate.
This they did by blowing up a lot of engines, and when they did finally find the correct plate, they tested instability by putting an explosive charge and detonating it inside the combustion chamber while the engine was running. The F1 self-stabilized with the correct plate, within 1/10th of a second.
--
BMO
The only real game in the Winter Olympics is curling.
--
BMO
I can ignore it because NBC has ruined it.
The last time I saw good Olympics coverage was when I was in Canada and watching the 1998 Winter Olympics in Nagano via the CBC.
I'm skipping this one.
--
BMO
After the disappointing, and frankly insulting performance put on by Matt Lauer and Meredith Viera (who I watched while growing up as local TV personalities) and the execrable Ryan Seacrest interviewing Michael Phelps instead of showing the 7/7 memorial, and the NOT EVEN 5 MINUTES BETWEEN COMMERCIALS, I'm done with the Olympics for this go-round.
So much this: http://www.slate.com/blogs/five_ring_circus/2012/07/28/nbc_olympics_coverage_meredith_vieira_think_it_s_cool_to_be_ignorant_.html
FUCK NBC. Fuck all of this crap.
Yes, the Mars Landing is much more relevant. I would rather watch grass grow and paint dry than turn on NBC coverage of the Olympics.
--
BMO
>never built
http://www.flickr.com/photos/timserge/3352770806/
Seeya.
--
BMO
>BS, it was a study, a never built paper engine.
>first launch: 1967
Yup. Never built.
Even if all it did was sit in the test stand and get tested, it's a real engine.
Get stuffed.
--
BMO
You're forgetting the F-1A.
The F1 was designed in 1959. The F1A is an improved version, which is what we're really talking about.
And the F1A has these stats:
Rocketdyne Lox/Kerosene rocket engine. 9189.6 kN. Study 1968. Designed for booster applications. Gas generator, pump-fed. Isp=310s.
Thrust (sl): 8,003.800 kN (1,799,326 lbf). Thrust (sl): 816,178 kgf. Engine: 8,098 kg (17,853 lb). Chamber Pressure: 70.00 bar. Area Ratio: 16. Propellant Formulation: Lox/RP-1. Thrust to Weight Ratio: 115.71.
Status: Study 1968.
Unfuelled mass: 8,098 kg (17,853 lb).
Height: 5.48 m (17.97 ft).
Diameter: 3.61 m (11.84 ft).
Thrust: 9,189.60 kN (2,065,904 lbf).
Specific impulse: 310 s.
Specific impulse sea level: 270 s.
Burn time: 158 s.
First Launch: 1967.
Source: http://www.astronautix.com/engines/f1a.htm
The RD-170 has these stats:
Chambers: 4. Thrust (sl): 7,550.000 kN (1,697,300 lbf). Thrust (sl): 769,876 kgf. Engine: 9,750 kg (21,490 lb). Chamber Pressure: 245.00 bar. Area Ratio: 36.87. Thrust to Weight Ratio: 82.66. Oxidizer to Fuel Ratio: 2.6.
AKA: 11D520.
Status: Development ended 1976.
Unfuelled mass: 9,750 kg (21,490 lb).
Height: 3.78 m (12.40 ft).
Diameter: 4.02 m (13.17 ft).
Thrust: 7,903.00 kN (1,776,665 lbf).
Specific impulse: 337 s.
Specific impulse sea level: 309 s.
Burn time: 150 s.
First Launch: 1981-93.
Number: 12 .
Source: http://www.astronautix.com/engines/rd170.htm
Chest thumping? I think not.
--
BMO
Yeahbut....we wouldn't be basing the new F-1 type engine on the original F-1, we'd be using the F-1A.
The F-1A has 33 percent more thrust than the F-1.
9,189.60 kN for the F-1A versus 7,887 kN for the RD-171
But here is where the real difference comes in:
Lox/RP-1. Thrust to Weight Ratio: 115.71. for the F-1A
It's 82 for your Russian motor. Thus the advantage of using one combustion chamber compared to using 4.
Modern materials should lighten the F-1A and modern controls should improve efficiency and thrust even more to improve the thrust to weight ratio.
Why the Russians never use large combustion chambers and why you see 4 of them on the RD-171: They never solved the problem of combustion instability beyond a certain size. We did.
--
BMO
>Why even study redesigning the F1?
Because it's the largest liquid fueled engine in existence, and it works. Nobody has anything comparable to it, not even the Russians. There's a reason why the Russians use so many smaller engines.
Why design from scratch when you have known working prototypes? Only fools reinvent the wheel. Indeed, going back and redesigning the "shower head" fuel injection plate would be just nuts as it works fabulously.
A lighter, more efficient F-1A would be really, really sweet.
--
BMO
I would taunt you, but taunting the mentally disabled is considered bad form.
--
BMO
I was joking before. I'm not now.
Take your meds.
Your meds. Take them. Now.
--
BMO
Pedants march to rules
Mansplain to everyone else
Fun removed from all!
--
BMO
I'm going to deign to reply because I feel it needs saying:
1. Unless you can prove something is secure, it isn't. Skype cannot be proved secure, thus it is insecure.
2. You're a bigot on top of being an asshole. Say hello to your new status.
3. Bye, idiot.
--
BMO
>Archery == Senseless violence
Okay.
Plonk.
--
BMO
Apparently they found out on their own that the most efficient way for getting "crude dopamine-triggering effects" was "simulated weaponry".
Real weaponry is an efficient way of getting "dopamine triggering effects," thus my obsession as a teen with archery.
--
BMO
>Perhaps I was being too subtle, but how could Militant Agnostic know that tolerance is good?
Perhaps I'm being too subtle.
If you cannot divine my thoughts on the matter from what I've already written and referred you to, then I don't know what to say.
> Also, you may be confusing political tolerance with epistemological tolerance.
Why can't we have both?
Duh?
>Would The GratefulNet kill or prosecute the superstitious, or just not accept their claims?
Why don't you ask him? And there is a whole spectrum of intolerance between killing and not accepting claims.
You are being deliberately thick for no reason whatsoever. I'm done talking.
--
BMO
"When asked repeatedly a Microsoft spokesperson refused to confirm or deny that Skype conversations [could be monitored]
Then it's not. When you have to guess, in this case, whether skype is secure, assume the worst. Absence of proof of security is proof of no security.
--
BMO
Excuse me as I beat you senseless with a rolled up copy of "The Bloudy Tenant of Persecution for Cause of Conscience" by the founder of my state.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bloudy_Tenent_of_Persecution_for_Cause_of_Conscience
Read and begone.
--
BMO