Why support Firefox 0.8? Anything prior to 1.0 was essentially beta software. Would you explicitly support a version of IE, after it had gone RTM?
Firefox doesn't seem to gain much bloat (yet) from version to version, so I can't understand why there are still people running pre-1.0 versions of it.
It looks like billiondollarhomepage.com was registered 2weeks after milliondollarhomepage.com
As is trilliondollarhomepage.com, quadrilliondollarhomepage.com, sextilliondollarhomepage.com, zilliondollarhomepage.com, and at the other end of the scale, hundredthousanddollarhomepage.com, thousanddollarhomepage.com, hundreddollarhomepage.com, tendollarhomepage.com, onedollarhomepage.com, tencenthomepage.com and onecenthomepage.com.
I lived/worked in St Petersburg for almost a year (I'm originally from.NZ). On the main street in St Petersburg, there are shops that are just like any other music/video store, totally professional shop fittings and overall image - except everything they sell in there is pirated. And it's extremely well pirated - the Russians are masters at copying things, and some of their pirated CDs are hard to distinguish - I'm talking professionally pressed (not burned) CDs, colour CD inlays that have been professionally printed (not colour-photocopied). If you didn't know about the piracy issue in Russia, you could be forgiven for thinking these were legit products.
Anyway, getting back to the topic of the parent post, I can also vouch for a fairly strong anti-American feeling in Russia (among other places I've been), and resentment at America's foreign policy. I don't think the average Russian is just going to set down and let corporate America steamroll their way of life. Russia already is trying to clamp down on piracy, but with a corrupt government infrastructure, all it takes is the bribing of some official, and the problem gets ignored. At any rate, if the piracy problem is to be stamped out, it has to come from within. I'd expect a very large backlash if it was seen to be America imposing their laws on Russian people.
Languages - well , the whole language can be broken down in 1 4hr lesson into a massive 1 foot sized flow chart and rules, the rest are just like learning C++, all the verbs and nouns and functions.
I don't know what your C++ coding is like, but as a person who has learned three additional (natural) languages, I can say that learning to speak a foreign language is not just about technical grammar. Pronunciation, syllable stress, and most importantly understanding colloquial meaning or implied meaning play a major role. These things are not so easily expressed as a flow chart.
What amazes me more so, is some of the various forum software that displays "queries executed: 39" or similar at the bottom of the page - and you know the site is running off an older MySQL, probably using MyISAM table type (table-level locking!!). Considering the very nature of these forums - lots of people posting threads = lots of SQL INSERTs = lots of waiting for a table to be unlocked.
How some of these sites actually managed to scale is quite incredible...
While PostgreSQL has been my preference for many years now, it's good to finally see MySQL catching up, considering the amount of software that insists you use MySQL to power it. Maybe the MySQL users will finally get a taste of what they've been missing out on all these years.
I guess the Russians must have figured out what they were doing wrong then, when they built the RD-180 (http://www.spaceandtech.com/spacedata/engines/rd1 80_sum.shtml) and licensed it to Pratt & Whitney to be used for Atlas V, US military launches.
Russian engines have had greater lifting power for many years, and Russian-developed RD-180 (around 4000kN) engines are made by Pratt & Whitney for Atlas V launches. Compare this to the SSME (Space Shuttle Main Engine) at about 2000kN, and it makes me curious why they don't opt for a proven, heavy-lifting engine like the RD-180 (at least for the cargo lifter).
Cockpit masks don't "drop down" - They're a far more robust (and bulky) construction than the el-cheapo plastic cup+bag things the passenger cabin has, and anyway the space above the pilots tends to be occupied by switch gear and breakers. They're stowed within easy reach of each pilot (to the side, under the seat).
You are right, commercial airliners have switch panels above. It depends on the aircraft, how/where the gas masks are in the cockpit. You fail to mention that the cockpit also has secondary gas masks with standalone gas bottles, should the main supply fail.
Lower level surely you mean (be it in terms of altitude or barometric pressure).
I mean as in the depressurisation alert in the cockpit sounds before the main cabin. Higher air pressure, lower level of depressurisation. Let's mince words.
The radio altimeter you mean? The one which provides highly accurate relative readings, but only when you're reasonably close to the ground (ie within 1 or 2k feet)? I've never heard it called "ground avoidance radar"...
Ground avoidance radar is a military term for it. If it goes off at 10,000ft, chances are it's malfunctioning, or you're flying over a mountain range. I'd like to think a few people were awake before it actually sounded at 2,000ft ASL.
If you were a pilot you would know that ILS and auto-land systems have existed since at least the 1960's which can guide an aeroplane to within 50ft or so of the runway and that more recent ILS (since the 80s or so? can bring the aeroplane to 0ft. You'd also know that ILS uses two polarised planes of radio waves - GPS doesn't come into it at all.
Of course I know about ILS. And great, if the plane is actually within range of an airport, it might even pick up an ILS beacon. While it's in the middle of the atlantic though, those signals tend to get a bit weak. Have a read up on DGPS. It's where the fun is at these days.
(FWIW, my father *really* is a retired commercial aviation pilot).
So my 400 odd hours as a commercial pilot (albeit not a passenger airliner pilot) doesn't count?
To all the people who are rubbishing the parent post, I'd like to chip in my 2 cents worth.
As a retired pilot, I have flown a variety of aircraft, and experienced the effects of unpressurised flight flight about 10,000ft.
We ~do~ have the technology to fit sensors to cabins that detect depressurisation. Heck, what do you think triggers the oxygen masks to drop down in the first place? The problem lies with what do we do once we know the cabin is depressurised. There aren't that many places in the world where the ground terrain rises above 10,000ft, so, barring a collision with another aircraft flying the same heading, it would be feasible for the autopilot to make an emergency descent. Even if there was ground rising above 10,000ft, modern aircraft are fitted with ground avoidance radar (what causes the 'whoop-whoop, pull up!' scenario). Levelling out at 12,000ft is enough for a few people to come to and do something heroic. Flying for a few hours at that altitude on autopilot is far more likely to result in a good outcome than at 39,000ft with a frigid, depressurised cabin.
Also, don't forget that the cockpit oxygen masks drop down before the main cabin - the cockpit pressure sensor is pegged at a higher level, so that if there is a slow leak, the pilots can don their masks early and do a more controlled descent.
But, as for the plane landing itself... well, we're still a fair way off with that one. Airports have to be equipeed with differential GPS beacons that allow the plane to determine its position down to about half a metre. And this is also assuming that the aircraft has automatically reported a mayday, allowing ATC to clear the pattern. It'll get there one day, but there are still a lot of what-if scenarious that the autopilot 'AI' would have to cope with.
I agree. Satellite TV realised this years ago - if they didn't take the initiative and encrypt their signal, they'd be giving away free content. The guys that go to considerable lengths to break that encryption - are obviously committing a crime.
But anyone stupid enough to use a broadcast medium such as RF, and not apply some kind of security and access controls, is asking for that service to be abused.
Someone previously posted here on/. that technically a DHCP ACK could be construed as granting permission to use the network. Come on folks, this is so seriously simple to even just turn off DHCP, then at least you can argue that the AP is not responding to requests to use the network.
Better yet, get real about WiFi security, use WPA+AES and 802.1x or a good long PSK.
Exactly. Perfect 24-hour days would result in time drift similar to cheap PC RTC chip (relative to actual astonomical time that is). Tweaking by a leap second now and then is far less disruptive than tweaking by an hour every 500-600 years (not that it will be any of OUR problems).
If there were going to be radical changes made to timekeeping, I expect that decimal time would be the top candidate.
Have they thought about redefining the length of a second (and consequently minute, hour) to achieve these perfect 24-hour days?...usual short-sighted thinking by the Americans.
Slashdot Mirror
Most universities have a sizeable netblock. Identifying the users' universities could have been as simple as doing a whois lookup on the IP address.
Terms like "fast", "slow", or "big" are comparative.
Actually, "fast", "slow", and "big" are adjectives. "Faster", "slower" and "bigger" are comparatives.
Why support Firefox 0.8? Anything prior to 1.0 was essentially beta software. Would you explicitly support a version of IE, after it had gone RTM? Firefox doesn't seem to gain much bloat (yet) from version to version, so I can't understand why there are still people running pre-1.0 versions of it.
It looks like billiondollarhomepage.com was registered 2weeks after milliondollarhomepage.com
As is trilliondollarhomepage.com, quadrilliondollarhomepage.com, sextilliondollarhomepage.com, zilliondollarhomepage.com, and at the other end of the scale, hundredthousanddollarhomepage.com, thousanddollarhomepage.com, hundreddollarhomepage.com, tendollarhomepage.com, onedollarhomepage.com, tencenthomepage.com and onecenthomepage.com.
Several filesystems on Linux have support ACLs for a couple of years now... ext2/ext3, ReiserFS, XFS....
Can't SELinux achieve this (ie, fine grained security access control within the kernel)?
I lived/worked in St Petersburg for almost a year (I'm originally from .NZ). On the main street in St Petersburg, there are shops that are just like any other music/video store, totally professional shop fittings and overall image - except everything they sell in there is pirated. And it's extremely well pirated - the Russians are masters at copying things, and some of their pirated CDs are hard to distinguish - I'm talking professionally pressed (not burned) CDs, colour CD inlays that have been professionally printed (not colour-photocopied). If you didn't know about the piracy issue in Russia, you could be forgiven for thinking these were legit products.
Anyway, getting back to the topic of the parent post, I can also vouch for a fairly strong anti-American feeling in Russia (among other places I've been), and resentment at America's foreign policy. I don't think the average Russian is just going to set down and let corporate America steamroll their way of life. Russia already is trying to clamp down on piracy, but with a corrupt government infrastructure, all it takes is the bribing of some official, and the problem gets ignored. At any rate, if the piracy problem is to be stamped out, it has to come from within. I'd expect a very large backlash if it was seen to be America imposing their laws on Russian people.
Languages - well , the whole language can be broken down in 1 4hr lesson into a massive 1 foot sized flow chart and rules, the rest are just like learning C++, all the verbs and nouns and functions.
I don't know what your C++ coding is like, but as a person who has learned three additional (natural) languages, I can say that learning to speak a foreign language is not just about technical grammar. Pronunciation, syllable stress, and most importantly understanding colloquial meaning or implied meaning play a major role. These things are not so easily expressed as a flow chart.
What amazes me more so, is some of the various forum software that displays "queries executed: 39" or similar at the bottom of the page - and you know the site is running off an older MySQL, probably using MyISAM table type (table-level locking!!). Considering the very nature of these forums - lots of people posting threads = lots of SQL INSERTs = lots of waiting for a table to be unlocked. How some of these sites actually managed to scale is quite incredible... While PostgreSQL has been my preference for many years now, it's good to finally see MySQL catching up, considering the amount of software that insists you use MySQL to power it. Maybe the MySQL users will finally get a taste of what they've been missing out on all these years.
I guess the Russians must have figured out what they were doing wrong then, when they built the RD-180 (http://www.spaceandtech.com/spacedata/engines/rd1 80_sum.shtml) and licensed it to Pratt & Whitney to be used for Atlas V, US military launches.
Russian engines have had greater lifting power for many years, and Russian-developed RD-180 (around 4000kN) engines are made by Pratt & Whitney for Atlas V launches. Compare this to the SSME (Space Shuttle Main Engine) at about 2000kN, and it makes me curious why they don't opt for a proven, heavy-lifting engine like the RD-180 (at least for the cargo lifter).
Cockpit masks don't "drop down" - They're a far more robust (and bulky) construction than the el-cheapo plastic cup+bag things the passenger cabin has, and anyway the space above the pilots tends to be occupied by switch gear and breakers. They're stowed within easy reach of each pilot (to the side, under the seat).
You are right, commercial airliners have switch panels above. It depends on the aircraft, how/where the gas masks are in the cockpit. You fail to mention that the cockpit also has secondary gas masks with standalone gas bottles, should the main supply fail.
Lower level surely you mean (be it in terms of altitude or barometric pressure).
I mean as in the depressurisation alert in the cockpit sounds before the main cabin. Higher air pressure, lower level of depressurisation. Let's mince words.
The radio altimeter you mean? The one which provides highly accurate relative readings, but only when you're reasonably close to the ground (ie within 1 or 2k feet)? I've never heard it called "ground avoidance radar"...
Ground avoidance radar is a military term for it. If it goes off at 10,000ft, chances are it's malfunctioning, or you're flying over a mountain range. I'd like to think a few people were awake before it actually sounded at 2,000ft ASL.
If you were a pilot you would know that ILS and auto-land systems have existed since at least the 1960's which can guide an aeroplane to within 50ft or so of the runway and that more recent ILS (since the 80s or so? can bring the aeroplane to 0ft. You'd also know that ILS uses two polarised planes of radio waves - GPS doesn't come into it at all.
Of course I know about ILS. And great, if the plane is actually within range of an airport, it might even pick up an ILS beacon. While it's in the middle of the atlantic though, those signals tend to get a bit weak. Have a read up on DGPS. It's where the fun is at these days.
(FWIW, my father *really* is a retired commercial aviation pilot).
So my 400 odd hours as a commercial pilot (albeit not a passenger airliner pilot) doesn't count?
To all the people who are rubbishing the parent post, I'd like to chip in my 2 cents worth.
As a retired pilot, I have flown a variety of aircraft, and experienced the effects of unpressurised flight flight about 10,000ft.
We ~do~ have the technology to fit sensors to cabins that detect depressurisation. Heck, what do you think triggers the oxygen masks to drop down in the first place? The problem lies with what do we do once we know the cabin is depressurised. There aren't that many places in the world where the ground terrain rises above 10,000ft, so, barring a collision with another aircraft flying the same heading, it would be feasible for the autopilot to make an emergency descent. Even if there was ground rising above 10,000ft, modern aircraft are fitted with ground avoidance radar (what causes the 'whoop-whoop, pull up!' scenario). Levelling out at 12,000ft is enough for a few people to come to and do something heroic. Flying for a few hours at that altitude on autopilot is far more likely to result in a good outcome than at 39,000ft with a frigid, depressurised cabin.
Also, don't forget that the cockpit oxygen masks drop down before the main cabin - the cockpit pressure sensor is pegged at a higher level, so that if there is a slow leak, the pilots can don their masks early and do a more controlled descent.
But, as for the plane landing itself... well, we're still a fair way off with that one. Airports have to be equipeed with differential GPS beacons that allow the plane to determine its position down to about half a metre. And this is also assuming that the aircraft has automatically reported a mayday, allowing ATC to clear the pattern. It'll get there one day, but there are still a lot of what-if scenarious that the autopilot 'AI' would have to cope with.
I agree. Satellite TV realised this years ago - if they didn't take the initiative and encrypt their signal, they'd be giving away free content. The guys that go to considerable lengths to break that encryption - are obviously committing a crime.
/. that technically a DHCP ACK could be construed as granting permission to use the network. Come on folks, this is so seriously simple to even just turn off DHCP, then at least you can argue that the AP is not responding to requests to use the network.
But anyone stupid enough to use a broadcast medium such as RF, and not apply some kind of security and access controls, is asking for that service to be abused.
Someone previously posted here on
Better yet, get real about WiFi security, use WPA+AES and 802.1x or a good long PSK.
This reminds me of the space probe NASA lost due to confusion over metric/imperial measurements - http://www.space.com/news/orbiter_error_990930.htm l
Do we really trust America to mess with standards?
Exactly. Perfect 24-hour days would result in time drift similar to cheap PC RTC chip (relative to actual astonomical time that is). Tweaking by a leap second now and then is far less disruptive than tweaking by an hour every 500-600 years (not that it will be any of OUR problems). If there were going to be radical changes made to timekeeping, I expect that decimal time would be the top candidate. Have they thought about redefining the length of a second (and consequently minute, hour) to achieve these perfect 24-hour days? ...usual short-sighted thinking by the Americans.
Ich denke genau so wie Sie. Wir werden alle deutsch sprechen!