But that's wrong. So wrong that you failed to read this:
>Now. Youâ(TM)ll note that all of this software is GPLâ(TM)d. Which means any Tom, Dick or Harry (or any other awesome name) can build their own binaries and distribute it on their website or repository. And I have absolutely no problem with that. None whatsoever.
That. I gave up spamfighting as a hobby when the spammers stopped looking for open relays and went to just hijacking broadband connections and botnets. It's one thing when you could fire off a postmaster@example.com and cross your fingers that it would get read and an account nuked or a relay closed, but something entirely when a spammer's got his load spread among 1,000 (or tens or hundreds of thousand) broadband Wintel toybox machines.
>implying what I wrote must mean it was I in particular that had a misconfigured sendmail. >implying that it was hard to have a misconfigured sendmail. >implying my days of participation in NANAE back in 1998 as a freelance spamfighter (as a hobby, everybody needs one.) wasn't the basis of my previous message >doesn't recognise the lumber cartel reference, which comes from NANAE. >implying.
Yeah, I do. I also remember relay rape and all that fun stuff when you didn't have your mail server configured just right and a spammer would take it over and you'd get a nastygram from your provider.
In my experience when something is merely a technological hump to get over (and not depending on a breakthrough in physics), the person saying "it can't be done" is invariably wrong.
No, you could never have technical documentation show up in front of you, hands free, while you're working on something like a car, machine, or plane or anything else. no, it would never happen. A soldier, police officer, fireman could never have a lightweight video feed coming from the drone overhead, either. No, never happen.
Dude... don't do that. We know what it is. And for those who don't, google is --->over there.
>Oh I do not doubt that current stealth technology can be rendered obsolete if not already in some cases, however while we read about breakthroughs in RADAR technology when it occurs we rarely read about stealth technologies until they are implemented or already surpassed.
I was talking about the planes we have built. If you can detect a.5mm raindrop, at 2km, you sure as hell can detect a 42mm ball bearing - the current (optimistic) radar profile of the F35.
These airframes need to be relevant for the next 25-30 years (look at the life of the f-14, f-111, f-16, f-18 Hornet and Super Hornet, f-15 Eagle and Strike Eagle for comparison).
Somehow I don't think the stealth capabilities are going to be relevant in 5 years.
They claim they can see a rain drop out to 2 kilometers.
Fine. Let that be our upper limit for angular diameter. We shall use the largest rain drop of.005m (5mm, but.005m for the sake of units) mentioned earlier to figure this out. We shall then use the angular diameter to figure out how far a golf ball has to be to be the same apparent size (angular diameter).
Using the large raindrop is our best bet for reality. It keeps us from pushing out the golf ball sphere to ridiculous distances.
Here, let's do some math.
Since unicode sucks here, it goes like this:
Angle = 2 x Arcsin(radius of sphere divided by distance)
For a flat circle, it's an arctan but we're not using a flat circle. At this distance and size of targets, it doesn't make much difference, but we're using the correct formula for formality's sake.
Angle = 2x Arcsin(.0025 / 2000m)
0.000143239 degrees, or about.5 seconds (take number, multiply by 3600)
A golf ball is 42.67mm in diameter at a minimum, but let's just truncate this for simplicity and readability, and the error makes the radius of detection smaller..042m/Sin (.00000413239/2) = 1164km
1164km = maximum effective range to detect a steel golf ball with this radar as long as you can detect the signal (for clarity, I am omitting signal strength and inverse-square law and what it does to detector size).
But then you say "read the article"
>With such small pulse volumes, it becomes possible to measure the properties of individual raindrops greater than 0.5mm
Their minimum raindrop is 1/10 smaller in diameter than the one used in this post. If I had put in.5mm in for calculating angular resolution, I would have pushed out the steel ball 10x the distance, a credulity straining distance.
Stealth is toast. It is obsolete.
QED.
Note: Please do not confuse angle of detection with beam width.
It's only a matter of time that other countries develop "weather radar" as pinpoint as this.
The F22 and F35 radar cross sections have been compared to a metal marble and a metal golf ball, respectively. Their "stealth technology" has just been rendered obsolete.
You failed to take the whole sentence and evaluate it for intent.
Teaching critical thinking challenges the kids to think about what other people tell them. Oh wait, "other people" also includes parents. And that's what it says right there at the end. They're deathly afraid that kids might challenge the bullshit their parents may be feeding them, and by extension, those in authority.
The opposition to critical thinking is not about teaching kids to be smart, it's about teaching them to be obedient at all costs. They are sacrificing thirst for knowledge for obedience. They really don't give a shit about teaching children reading comprehension, math, art, science. They want little thoughtless drones out of the public schools. The private schools will teach the critical thinking to the ruling class kids, like they always have.
It is nothing short of which we accuse the Islamist states of doing to their children.
I have you friended, because at one time I thought you were smart. Indeed, I believe you were one of the first I friended. So much for that.
I'm not saying they're perfect. If you go back and read my previous message with the drunken lawyer, at the end I say that they were either incompetent back then, or they are incompetent now, depending on if they are successful.
Successful: We were dumb. Unsuccessful: We are dumb.
Medical testing on animals may be done badly by some researchers, but there is no substitute for the method. When done correctly by people who know what they're doing, the science works spectacularly. To do away with it would be the death of millions.
But hey, don't let reality get in the way of your blind rage.
>I don't believe that has anything to do with what I said.
It does, actually. We, as humans, have more than once decided who is more worthy of life among ourselves than another, with disastrous results. And you've gone down this road mentally, thought about it, and wrote down that you're not sure if certain humans should be allowed to live versus another species or whether humans are worth sticking up for at all.
>No, it's just that you lack the imagination required to imagine a scenario where someone has empathy for both members of other species and members of their own species.
We had people like this. We called them eugenicists. The idea was a disaster, because while the basic idea may have seemed noble at the time, it led to the deaths of millions.
Slashdot Mirror
>The problem with that is... they don't get the binaries, they can't try out the software and learn how good it is.
Sure they can.
They can compile it their own damn selves.
--
BMO
But that's wrong. So wrong that you failed to read this:
>Now. Youâ(TM)ll note that all of this software is GPLâ(TM)d. Which means any Tom, Dick or Harry (or any other awesome name) can build their own binaries and distribute it on their website or repository. And I have absolutely no problem with that. None whatsoever.
>modded informative
And the moderator was wrong too.
--
BMO
>People still download it and and run it.
That. I gave up spamfighting as a hobby when the spammers stopped looking for open relays and went to just hijacking broadband connections and botnets. It's one thing when you could fire off a postmaster@example.com and cross your fingers that it would get read and an account nuked or a relay closed, but something entirely when a spammer's got his load spread among 1,000 (or tens or hundreds of thousand) broadband Wintel toybox machines.
--
BMO
>implying what I wrote must mean it was I in particular that had a misconfigured sendmail.
>implying that it was hard to have a misconfigured sendmail.
>implying my days of participation in NANAE back in 1998 as a freelance spamfighter (as a hobby, everybody needs one.) wasn't the basis of my previous message
>doesn't recognise the lumber cartel reference, which comes from NANAE.
>implying.
Yeah well, whatever.
--
BMO
I manually sig my own posts, because I've done it for 25 years now. I'm just going with what I've always used..
He is simply "bredt milk fart commander" mad that I don't use the Slashdot sig facility. He has been at me for months (a year now?) about it.
Don't ask me why.
--
BMO
Remember when people ran their own mail servers?
Yeah, I do. I also remember relay rape and all that fun stuff when you didn't have your mail server configured just right and a spammer would take it over and you'd get a nastygram from your provider.
--
BMO - Lumber Cartel member #2501
In my experience when something is merely a technological hump to get over (and not depending on a breakthrough in physics), the person saying "it can't be done" is invariably wrong.
--
BMO
No, you could never have technical documentation show up in front of you, hands free, while you're working on something like a car, machine, or plane or anything else. no, it would never happen. A soldier, police officer, fireman could never have a lightweight video feed coming from the drone overhead, either. No, never happen.
--
BMO
people would probably not think a guy living in a van down by the river was all that shady if the van had a good paintjob,
You mean the "Free Candy" on the side was not a good idea?
--
BMO
>Explaining what stealth is
Dude... don't do that. We know what it is. And for those who don't, google is --->over there.
>Oh I do not doubt that current stealth technology can be rendered obsolete if not already in some cases, however while we read about breakthroughs in RADAR technology when it occurs we rarely read about stealth technologies until they are implemented or already surpassed.
I was talking about the planes we have built. If you can detect a .5mm raindrop, at 2km, you sure as hell can detect a 42mm ball bearing - the current (optimistic) radar profile of the F35.
These airframes need to be relevant for the next 25-30 years (look at the life of the f-14, f-111, f-16, f-18 Hornet and Super Hornet, f-15 Eagle and Strike Eagle for comparison).
Somehow I don't think the stealth capabilities are going to be relevant in 5 years.
--
BMO
I said .042m/Sin (.00000413239/2) = 1164km
This is wrong.
I forgot to use the radius of the golf ball, which is .021
Which gives 582km instead, not 1164km
--
BMO
They claim they can see a rain drop out to 2 kilometers.
Fine. Let that be our upper limit for angular diameter. We shall use the largest rain drop of .005m (5mm, but .005m for the sake of units) mentioned earlier to figure this out. We shall then use the angular diameter to figure out how far a golf ball has to be to be the same apparent size (angular diameter).
Using the large raindrop is our best bet for reality. It keeps us from pushing out the golf ball sphere to ridiculous distances.
Here, let's do some math.
Since unicode sucks here, it goes like this:
Angle = 2 x Arcsin(radius of sphere divided by distance)
For a flat circle, it's an arctan but we're not using a flat circle. At this distance and size of targets, it doesn't make much difference, but we're using the correct formula for formality's sake.
Angle = 2x Arcsin(.0025 / 2000m)
0.000143239 degrees, or about .5 seconds (take number, multiply by 3600)
A golf ball is 42.67mm in diameter at a minimum, but let's just truncate this for simplicity and readability, and the error makes the radius of detection smaller. .042m/Sin (.00000413239/2) = 1164km
1164km = maximum effective range to detect a steel golf ball with this radar as long as you can detect the signal (for clarity, I am omitting signal strength and inverse-square law and what it does to detector size).
But then you say "read the article"
>With such small pulse volumes, it becomes possible to measure the properties of individual raindrops greater than 0.5mm
Their minimum raindrop is 1/10 smaller in diameter than the one used in this post. If I had put in .5mm in for calculating angular resolution, I would have pushed out the steel ball 10x the distance, a credulity straining distance.
Stealth is toast. It is obsolete.
QED.
Note: Please do not confuse angle of detection with beam width.
--
BMO
>Doppler radar can actually spot individual raindrops in a cloudburst,
A raindrop, you say? Like what, a big one? Ok, that's 5mm across for the largest type. From here: http://hypertextbook.com/facts/2001/IgorVolynets.shtml
It's only a matter of time that other countries develop "weather radar" as pinpoint as this.
The F22 and F35 radar cross sections have been compared to a metal marble and a metal golf ball, respectively. Their "stealth technology" has just been rendered obsolete.
--
BMO
How you got modded up informative is beyond me.
You failed to take the whole sentence and evaluate it for intent.
Teaching critical thinking challenges the kids to think about what other people tell them. Oh wait, "other people" also includes parents. And that's what it says right there at the end. They're deathly afraid that kids might challenge the bullshit their parents may be feeding them, and by extension, those in authority.
The opposition to critical thinking is not about teaching kids to be smart, it's about teaching them to be obedient at all costs. They are sacrificing thirst for knowledge for obedience. They really don't give a shit about teaching children reading comprehension, math, art, science. They want little thoughtless drones out of the public schools. The private schools will teach the critical thinking to the ruling class kids, like they always have.
It is nothing short of which we accuse the Islamist states of doing to their children.
I have you friended, because at one time I thought you were smart. Indeed, I believe you were one of the first I friended. So much for that.
>lefty trolls
Yeah, well, whatever.
--
BMO
I'm not saying they're perfect. If you go back and read my previous message with the drunken lawyer, at the end I say that they were either incompetent back then, or they are incompetent now, depending on if they are successful.
Successful: We were dumb.
Unsuccessful: We are dumb.
I'm going with the latter.
--
BMO
You seem butthurt.
Medical testing on animals may be done badly by some researchers, but there is no substitute for the method. When done correctly by people who know what they're doing, the science works spectacularly. To do away with it would be the death of millions.
But hey, don't let reality get in the way of your blind rage.
--
BMO
>I don't believe that has anything to do with what I said.
It does, actually. We, as humans, have more than once decided who is more worthy of life among ourselves than another, with disastrous results. And you've gone down this road mentally, thought about it, and wrote down that you're not sure if certain humans should be allowed to live versus another species or whether humans are worth sticking up for at all.
Don't message me back.
--
BMO
1) don't use UEFI
There won't be a choice. BIOS is dead
2) add your own key into the EFI keychain
At 99 dollars a pop each time?
And you are OK with this?
Whose side are you on anyway?
--
BMO
>No, it's just that you lack the imagination required to imagine a scenario where someone has empathy for both members of other species and members of their own species.
We had people like this. We called them eugenicists. The idea was a disaster, because while the basic idea may have seemed noble at the time, it led to the deaths of millions.
I could go further, but I shall not.
I shall simply change your status.
--
BMO
>I don't believe it's possible to give a convincing argument for choosing you over a member of something else's species.
You are drowning.
Thumper is drowning.
Who am I to save. Hmm.... let me think about it.
Oh wait, I shouldn't think about it because I should pick you over Thumper. Because only people with absolute lack of empathy would pick Thumper.
Sorry if this annoys you.
--
BMO
>Yes, I'm pretty conflicted about animal experimentation myself
When it comes to life saving medicine, I'm not conflicted one bit.
Thumper or...
Me.
I vote me.
--
BMO
OK, thanks, this really helped out a lot.
--
BMO
Obviously.
I'll go get my meter checked.
--
BMO
I'm a drunken pig-nut oil magnate.
Where there's smoke, there's work.
--
BMO - Shoes for Industry!
(in reference to the meaning of your post, I was delighted when I found there is another bmo on the cartoon network)
But the point of the canonical (and redhat) bootloaders is that you can then build your own kernels without having to shell out 99 bucks every time.
What's the difference between chainloading XP and your own kernel?
--
BMO