A couple of things, one the Republicans are not the Democrats. And the Democrats of today are not the Democrats of the 50s. Secondly, The Republicans have been fighting tooth and nail against whatever the President has wanted to do since their exile. It's got nothing to do with what's good for the country it's about screwing over the Democrats.
Oh, bullshit. Republicans, or more accurately, Conservatives, have been fighting tooth and nail to stop virtually everything the Obama has done because we think it is very deeply wrong for the country. Read that again - I mean it and they mean it. I also note that the national Republican party is profoundly out of step with Conservatives and parasites like John McCain, Olympia Snowe, etc, are going along with the current hyper-leftist nonsense far too often. Witness their support for "immigration reform" AKA Amnesty. They, along with Obama and a fair bit of the remaining Democrats outside the liberal bastions, will be *swept away*.
Shoving things like Obamacare, endless union paybacks, etc, down people's throats against clear wishes of the American voting public while repeatedly accusing us of racism and stupidity will get them quite a reward, and it's well deserved. Time for the adults to take over and try to fix this fucking mess. I know what the slashdot community will say - we are all stupid racist rednecks. I don't care, they don't care, we will take back this country.
And, moreover, why do you expect to execute a boycott, but expect to still be able to benefit with no impact to you. It's your decision to make a statement with a boycott, sorry, but that has some consequences. And you certainly don't have an inalieniable right to boycott something but still get it anyway, sort of defeats any sort of moral stand you might be making.
Your argument is one of the most pathetic I have heard for this, and that's really setting the bar high.
Look. I pirate and many others on/. do as well. Everybody knows it is illegal and there is a chance of getting caught. I am just glad I am not the one getting caught, and I would be in trouble for much more than 37 songs.
Why in the world would you bother? Do you think the potential penalties (no matter how absurd) are really worth it? Can't you just pay the damn $10 a shot? Or are you doing it on some sort of half-assed "principle"?
Why in God's name would you give a computer to a 4-year-old? Give him a damn baseball or something, the last thing he needs in his formative years is to vegetate in front of a screen.
The OP was talking about live views from the sensort. Almost all of the live viewfinders are monitors, with pretty significant lag. That's the source of the "shutter lag" that people report. It's not the shutter that has the lag, it's the finder.
If you have a direct view finder (Leica, or any sort of optical "hole"), it doesn't have any lag - but it also doesn't really show you what the sensor sees, which is what the parent post was about.
You are wrong. Live viewfinders are great for things that don't move. But their inherent lag makes them impossible to use for anything that moves significantly.
That's not at all what I said, and does not follow from what I said. The goal is to *prevent* the attacks in the first place, not punish people afterwards. That can be accomplished any number of ways but searching people at the airport is not very effective. What you do is go after the sources of terrorism - Islamic extremeists - where they reside and draw resources from - the Middle East. And the state sponsors of terrorism - formerly Iraq, still Afghanistan, Iran, Syria, Palestinian authority, etc. Sort of like *we have been doing for the last 9 years*.
Treating this problem as an analogy to conventional police work is foolish, dangerous, and won't work. We tried that for decades and it in fact, didn't work. And it also leads to exactly the problem you argue against, specifically, policing *the wrong people* and doing nothing useful.
Searching grannies at the airport is a nonsensical farce, I think we all agree with that.
Nonsense. The Oklahoma City situation is a perfect example of what is wrong with the concept. All the things you said happen happened as you describe. But putting McVeigh in jail and exectuing him didn't bring anyone back to life. It did not and will not in the future *prevent* it from happening. The primary value of catching the "perpetrators" is deterrence for others. Putting terrorists in jail will not deter those in the future - they are already willing to die for their cause, no threat of punishment will prevent them from going ahead. So the idea that you are going to identify the "criminals" and put them in jail/execute them presumes that you will just take the hit, no matter the cost, and deal with the aftermath. That's why the "policing" concept has utterly failed.
All of the current drones rely primarily on an inertial reference (gyros and accelerometers) for short-term control. It uses GPS to provide updates to the system to correct for drift. That would work perfectly well with Sun and satellite ranging from existing satellites.
I think you misunderstand the issue. While it may be possible, very little if any drone flying (Predator, etc) is really live hand-flying of the airplane. You put in waypoints, tell it the altitude to fly, tell it to orbit about a point, etc, and the airplane does the actual flying. That's how the vast majority of airline flying works, too. In the case of the Mars airplane, it's actually a lot easier than a ground vehicle, since there are no obstacles aside from mountains, etc, that are already identified (and terrain avoidance technology is quite mature if you miss entering a hill in the database).
The only real problem is the power source, since it's not going to landing. That's where this project (and most other Mars airplane projects) seem to run in to trouble.
Additionally, they discount the fact that you can use the base to apply extra side-force to cut the corner faster. - the fastest path around the bases is to curve a little but mostly to use the inside corner of the base, with your outside foot, to push off in a new direction. Baseball has been played for 150 or so years,and has been studied to death by both the finest minds in sports and some of the best athletes, in real life. The ideal path has been known for more than a century, and coached accordingly.
Oh, goody, a lecture this morning. I hate to break it to you, but businesses ARE run by individuals, invested in by individuals, and employ individuals. They are collections of individuals. You are making a nonsensical distinction that happens to fit your concept of politics.
That's generally true, and the only weapon ever deployed that was prone to going off in an crash was probably Little Boy (that later went off on purpose over Hiroshima). The Mark IV, however, was probably somewhat more prone to accidental detonation that any of the others, which is why the core was inserted in-flight. Later, preventing accidental detonation became a serious issue and a lot of the later tests were negative tests to ensure that the safety features worked correctly.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh, bullshit. Republicans, or more accurately, Conservatives, have been fighting tooth and nail to stop virtually everything the Obama has done because we think it is very deeply wrong for the country. Read that again - I mean it and they mean it. I also note that the national Republican party is profoundly out of step with Conservatives and parasites like John McCain, Olympia Snowe, etc, are going along with the current hyper-leftist nonsense far too often. Witness their support for "immigration reform" AKA Amnesty. They, along with Obama and a fair bit of the remaining Democrats outside the liberal bastions, will be *swept away*.
Shoving things like Obamacare, endless union paybacks, etc, down people's throats against clear wishes of the American voting public while repeatedly accusing us of racism and stupidity will get them quite a reward, and it's well deserved. Time for the adults to take over and try to fix this fucking mess. I know what the slashdot community will say - we are all stupid racist rednecks. I don't care, they don't care, we will take back this country.
Brett
And, moreover, why do you expect to execute a boycott, but expect to still be able to benefit with no impact to you. It's your decision to make a statement with a boycott, sorry, but that has some consequences. And you certainly don't have an inalieniable right to boycott something but still get it anyway, sort of defeats any sort of moral stand you might be making.
Your argument is one of the most pathetic I have heard for this, and that's really setting the bar high.
There's these things you may have heard of - Compact Disc Digital Audio (CD's for short). They cost about $10.
Why in the world would you bother? Do you think the potential penalties (no matter how absurd) are really worth it? Can't you just pay the damn $10 a shot? Or are you doing it on some sort of half-assed "principle"?
A discovery that there are 4 full rotations of the Earth in one 24-hour day. You dumby!
Brilliant. Maybe we can find other people to surrender to, also. Think of the savings!
Why in God's name would you give a computer to a 4-year-old? Give him a damn baseball or something, the last thing he needs in his formative years is to vegetate in front of a screen.
Brett
You have *no* idea what you are talking about.
The OP was talking about live views from the sensort. Almost all of the live viewfinders are monitors, with pretty significant lag. That's the source of the "shutter lag" that people report. It's not the shutter that has the lag, it's the finder.
If you have a direct view finder (Leica, or any sort of optical "hole"), it doesn't have any lag - but it also doesn't really show you what the sensor sees, which is what the parent post was about.
You are wrong. Live viewfinders are great for things that don't move. But their inherent lag makes them impossible to use for anything that moves significantly.
So I guess my Leica M9 is still A-OK, eh? Geniuses.
None. It either works, or it doesn't.
Agreed with this. It's not forcing anyone into anything and it's pretty fun. Make sure it can make a radio and a radio transmitter.
That's not at all what I said, and does not follow from what I said. The goal is to *prevent* the attacks in the first place, not punish people afterwards. That can be accomplished any number of ways but searching people at the airport is not very effective. What you do is go after the sources of terrorism - Islamic extremeists - where they reside and draw resources from - the Middle East. And the state sponsors of terrorism - formerly Iraq, still Afghanistan, Iran, Syria, Palestinian authority, etc. Sort of like *we have been doing for the last 9 years*.
Treating this problem as an analogy to conventional police work is foolish, dangerous, and won't work. We tried that for decades and it in fact, didn't work. And it also leads to exactly the problem you argue against, specifically, policing *the wrong people* and doing nothing useful.
Searching grannies at the airport is a nonsensical farce, I think we all agree with that.
Nonsense. The Oklahoma City situation is a perfect example of what is wrong with the concept. All the things you said happen happened as you describe. But putting McVeigh in jail and exectuing him didn't bring anyone back to life. It did not and will not in the future *prevent* it from happening. The primary value of catching the "perpetrators" is deterrence for others. Putting terrorists in jail will not deter those in the future - they are already willing to die for their cause, no threat of punishment will prevent them from going ahead. So the idea that you are going to identify the "criminals" and put them in jail/execute them presumes that you will just take the hit, no matter the cost, and deal with the aftermath. That's why the "policing" concept has utterly failed.
Brett
Terrorism is not a police matter. That's the mistake that people have been making for years.
All of the current drones rely primarily on an inertial reference (gyros and accelerometers) for short-term control. It uses GPS to provide updates to the system to correct for drift. That would work perfectly well with Sun and satellite ranging from existing satellites.
I think you misunderstand the issue. While it may be possible, very little if any drone flying (Predator, etc) is really live hand-flying of the airplane. You put in waypoints, tell it the altitude to fly, tell it to orbit about a point, etc, and the airplane does the actual flying. That's how the vast majority of airline flying works, too. In the case of the Mars airplane, it's actually a lot easier than a ground vehicle, since there are no obstacles aside from mountains, etc, that are already identified (and terrain avoidance technology is quite mature if you miss entering a hill in the database).
The only real problem is the power source, since it's not going to landing. That's where this project (and most other Mars airplane projects) seem to run in to trouble.
Brett
It was Nov 9 GMT.
A diode *permits* a one-way flow of current.
We need a better algorithm.
Additionally, they discount the fact that you can use the base to apply extra side-force to cut the corner faster. - the fastest path around the bases is to curve a little but mostly to use the inside corner of the base, with your outside foot, to push off in a new direction. Baseball has been played for 150 or so years,and has been studied to death by both the finest minds in sports and some of the best athletes, in real life. The ideal path has been known for more than a century, and coached accordingly.
Oh, goody, a lecture this morning. I hate to break it to you, but businesses ARE run by individuals, invested in by individuals, and employ individuals. They are collections of individuals. You are making a nonsensical distinction that happens to fit your concept of politics.
That's generally true, and the only weapon ever deployed that was prone to going off in an crash was probably Little Boy (that later went off on purpose over Hiroshima). The Mark IV, however, was probably somewhat more prone to accidental detonation that any of the others, which is why the core was inserted in-flight. Later, preventing accidental detonation became a serious issue and a lot of the later tests were negative tests to ensure that the safety features worked correctly.
Full details of each type of bomb and the underlying design can be found at : http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/
Brett
slashdotted again!