I went through some effort to make myself as clear as possible, but let me go further since you're still not getting it.
Your point was that US Army is so overwhelmingly powerful that nobody has a chance to win against them and thus civilians should be disarmed. My rebuttal to that was, that's only true in conventional warfare. Then I cite Taliban as an example of how US Army is vulnerable to guerrilla tactics.
Then in a separate paragraph, with its own introductory sentence that starts with "And there's the question of loyalty in the military...", I point out that the army might not even fight at all. Robert E. Lee was mentioned in this paragraph as an example of a US Army officer deciding not to fight for the US Army. The citation of Robert E. Lee was in context of this paragraph only, not the entire post.
There is no force on earth that can stand up to the US military in a conventional battle. Does that mean every other group or nation should stop buying weapons because that would be wasted money?
Taliban and others have shown that US military is quite vulnerable in unconventional warfare. And that was in places where US soldiers didn't care that much about the local population. How do you think it will go down when the guerrilla fighters are blending into the civilian population of Kansas and Virginia instead of Mosul and Kandahar?
And there's the question of loyalty in the military. If things got so bad and the federal gov't so hated that a large scale armed uprising took place, it's quite likely that many of soldiers will either refuse to fight or join the other side. (look up Robert E. Lee sometime, he was a guy in the US Army but quit when his hometown buddies rose up against the gov't)
If the army refused to fight, the Capitol police and Secret Service can still own any unarmed mob storming DC and mow them down. But an armed mob? Not so easy.
Their latest authoritative decision is to forbid people who own more than 5% of a company's stock from selling for the next 6 months.
That's pretty insane. I can't see it going well.
That's fairly insane, but you know what's REALLY insane?
Chinese gov't is now allowing people to put up collateral and buy stocks on credit. What kind of collateral you ask? Real estate!
That's out-of-this-world insane, if you ask me. Frankly I'm stumped, because up to this point the Communist party leaders have been pretty competent, all things considered. Definitely more competent than the current USA regime.
Only answer I can think of is, the Commies are really noob when it comes to the stock market and don't know much about it. And, they're really, I mean REALLY scared of people with money (middle class and upwards) getting angry at the Party. People with money have disproportionately large influence in China (well okay it's like that everywhere but it's even more so in China) and an angry upper-middle class threatens the current regime's grip on power far more than angry peasants.
build a 1" thick hull out of steel in our desired shape, fill it with the same gases at the same temperatures and pressures in Earth's atmosphere, and let that baby loose on Venus.
I'm no aerodynamicist, but common sense tells me that the volume of your balloon city will have to be very large and the amount of 1" thick steel you need to bring from Earth will be so massive, most Mars colony proposals will seem lightweight in comparison. Might as well just go to Mars.
if you're gonna have a launch failure with total loss of all stages, at least this seems to be one of the better outcomes. First stage is very expensive and complex, fixing a major flaw there could take a long time and lots of money. But it looks like the first stage was working fine all the way to the (fiery) end, and it was a ruptured tank on the 2nd stage that caused the failure. Much better than the first stage exploding soon after liftoff.
Also note that FPV racers often race through forests and other interesting environments, so the chances for interesting crashes can be quite high.
Interesting point, I haven't thought of that. Maybe you could even build obstacle courses and windmills (like mini golf) that drones have to go through. That could be fun. Drones crashing is no big deal compared to a real airplanes crashing so they could add lots of stuff and fly very low.
FPV technology still sucks though, it needs to improve. Those beautiful FPV videos you see on Youtube, that's NOT what the pilot sees. Those footages are from GoPro recording that the guy retrieved from the SD card afterwards. Real-time transmission quality is very poor, it's just barely enough for the pilot to make out the sky, ground, tree.
but I can't see anyone getting interested as a spectator.
Real air racing is still around, featuring WW2 fighters thundering through the skies at 400mph, and interest from the general public is nil. There's a niche audience of aviation buffs but that's about it.
Drones are tiny compared to the majestic P-51s and Corsairs, and very twitchy, so it would be very difficult to keep a steady camera on them.
It could still take off, just don't expect to see it on ESPN anytime soon (or ever).
if the calibration data are so important that the engine shuts down without them, how did the aircraft take off?
One engine delivering full power and 3 engines running at low RPM would be enough to take off, since the plane was empty and probably had a small fuel load as well.
Looks like they took off, but noticed a problem with the engines, turned around to do an emergency landing, but hit an electrical pylon and crashed. So it's not like they lost all power and fell out of the sky, they had some power and were doing an emergency landing when they hit an object on the ground just before touchdown. 2 of the 6 people on the plane survived.
This is just a thought experiment, please don't crucify me:
People tend to think of humans as different from the rest of life on earth. All plants and animals except humans form a natural balance and live in harmony; only humans screw everything up by overpopulating themselves and their livestock while making everything else go extinct.
But what if that's wrong, and humans are no different? After all we have pretty much the same DNA and cellular structure as anything else on the planet. Those wonderful wolves and deer you mentioned are actually like 99% same as us. What if human behavior is the inevitable result of earth-type lifeform? On a cosmic scale, planet earth's biosphere is just a tiny speck. Maybe other types of lifeforms are much better suited for long-term advanced civilization, and planet earth biosphere (DNA based) is an evolutionary dead end. Analogy: earth life = trilobytes. Life on other planets = vertebrates
I see. So what you are saying is that there is a large number of skilled engineers and scientists, sitting at home watching TV, while they wait for salaries to go up?
No, they're doing something else in life. Working, teaching, studying, masturbating, whatever. Just not willing to work 80 hours a week for 50k a year.
Job skills and careers aren't things you can acquire and shift around instantly, it takes time. It took decades of abuse to get to this point. If a sensible gov't disbanded H1B program and said "fuck you" to Bill Gates right now, salaries will rise but you're not gonna have a sudden flood of programmers entering the job market. It takes times to make programmers. What you will have is a lot more students interested in CS.
Anyways I seriously doubt we'll be burning fossil fuels as our primary energy source in 2100. This is probably like politicians in 1880 signing a pledge to limit horse emissions before our cities drown in horse poop (a real concern at the time). Nice gesture but rendered moot by later technological advances.
It won't take a lot to achieve critical mass on this. Once people have electric, self-driving cars, the behaviors of the owners (for better or worse) will influence others.
I agree. And I think if a competent self driving car really happens (a big if), that shit will sell itself. A significant percentage of the population will jump at the chance to spend the time driving watching movies or playing games or doing work instead. Also a significant percentage of the population buys/leases a new car frequently (3 year leases are the most common).
Also, if a majority of new cars sold are self-driving, the dynamics of luxury and performance cars will change. Who needs that 500hp turbocharged V-8 when the computer is gonna drive at the speed limit anyways? People will mostly want a quieter cab and smoother ride rather than power and handling.
Slashdot Mirror
Cut just one day of funding to the illegal US military occupation in Iraq and you could fund NASA for an entire year.
Or just one day of funding to the illegal aliens with free stuff.
Hey, how about we cut BOTH, no more military occupations and no more free stuff to illegal aliens? Then we can fund NASA for TWO years!
What the fuck are you talking about?
I went through some effort to make myself as clear as possible, but let me go further since you're still not getting it.
Your point was that US Army is so overwhelmingly powerful that nobody has a chance to win against them and thus civilians should be disarmed. My rebuttal to that was, that's only true in conventional warfare. Then I cite Taliban as an example of how US Army is vulnerable to guerrilla tactics.
Then in a separate paragraph, with its own introductory sentence that starts with "And there's the question of loyalty in the military...", I point out that the army might not even fight at all. Robert E. Lee was mentioned in this paragraph as an example of a US Army officer deciding not to fight for the US Army. The citation of Robert E. Lee was in context of this paragraph only, not the entire post.
Get it now?
Not this tired old argument again.
There is no force on earth that can stand up to the US military in a conventional battle. Does that mean every other group or nation should stop buying weapons because that would be wasted money?
Taliban and others have shown that US military is quite vulnerable in unconventional warfare. And that was in places where US soldiers didn't care that much about the local population. How do you think it will go down when the guerrilla fighters are blending into the civilian population of Kansas and Virginia instead of Mosul and Kandahar?
And there's the question of loyalty in the military. If things got so bad and the federal gov't so hated that a large scale armed uprising took place, it's quite likely that many of soldiers will either refuse to fight or join the other side. (look up Robert E. Lee sometime, he was a guy in the US Army but quit when his hometown buddies rose up against the gov't)
If the army refused to fight, the Capitol police and Secret Service can still own any unarmed mob storming DC and mow them down. But an armed mob? Not so easy.
The exact same argument can be applied to Flash, at least a few years ago when it was used by vast majority of users on the internet.
Their latest authoritative decision is to forbid people who own more than 5% of a company's stock from selling for the next 6 months.
That's pretty insane. I can't see it going well.
That's fairly insane, but you know what's REALLY insane?
Chinese gov't is now allowing people to put up collateral and buy stocks on credit. What kind of collateral you ask? Real estate!
That's out-of-this-world insane, if you ask me. Frankly I'm stumped, because up to this point the Communist party leaders have been pretty competent, all things considered. Definitely more competent than the current USA regime.
Only answer I can think of is, the Commies are really noob when it comes to the stock market and don't know much about it. And, they're really, I mean REALLY scared of people with money (middle class and upwards) getting angry at the Party. People with money have disproportionately large influence in China (well okay it's like that everywhere but it's even more so in China) and an angry upper-middle class threatens the current regime's grip on power far more than angry peasants.
Lucas electrical system.
In rockets.
Isn't Jurassic actually the period BEFORE dinosaurs ruled the earth, and therefore the movie should've been called "Cretaceous Park"?
Never underestimate the ability of entertainment people to change facts around if they think it sounds better.
From TFA:
build a 1" thick hull out of steel in our desired shape,
fill it with the same gases at the same temperatures and pressures in Earth's atmosphere,
and let that baby loose on Venus.
I'm no aerodynamicist, but common sense tells me that the volume of your balloon city will have to be very large and the amount of 1" thick steel you need to bring from Earth will be so massive, most Mars colony proposals will seem lightweight in comparison. Might as well just go to Mars.
if you're gonna have a launch failure with total loss of all stages, at least this seems to be one of the better outcomes. First stage is very expensive and complex, fixing a major flaw there could take a long time and lots of money. But it looks like the first stage was working fine all the way to the (fiery) end, and it was a ruptured tank on the 2nd stage that caused the failure. Much better than the first stage exploding soon after liftoff.
https://www.google.com/maps/@3...
TFA doesn't link to it, so I had to some additional mouse clicking and text parsing to find it.
Mortal Kombat was banned simultaneously in Australia, Germany, U.K. and several other countries on what became known as Mortal Monday, 1993.
Fatality!
Also note that FPV racers often race through forests and other interesting environments, so the chances for interesting crashes can be quite high.
Interesting point, I haven't thought of that. Maybe you could even build obstacle courses and windmills (like mini golf) that drones have to go through. That could be fun. Drones crashing is no big deal compared to a real airplanes crashing so they could add lots of stuff and fly very low.
FPV technology still sucks though, it needs to improve. Those beautiful FPV videos you see on Youtube, that's NOT what the pilot sees. Those footages are from GoPro recording that the guy retrieved from the SD card afterwards. Real-time transmission quality is very poor, it's just barely enough for the pilot to make out the sky, ground, tree.
but I can't see anyone getting interested as a spectator.
Real air racing is still around, featuring WW2 fighters thundering through the skies at 400mph, and interest from the general public is nil. There's a niche audience of aviation buffs but that's about it.
Drones are tiny compared to the majestic P-51s and Corsairs, and very twitchy, so it would be very difficult to keep a steady camera on them.
It could still take off, just don't expect to see it on ESPN anytime soon (or ever).
Facebook already bought Oculus last year. Actually kind of makes sense that they'd sell units to Microsoft for Xbox use.
if the calibration data are so important that the engine shuts down without them, how did the aircraft take off?
One engine delivering full power and 3 engines running at low RPM would be enough to take off, since the plane was empty and probably had a small fuel load as well.
Wiki has an article on the crash: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2...
Looks like they took off, but noticed a problem with the engines, turned around to do an emergency landing, but hit an electrical pylon and crashed. So it's not like they lost all power and fell out of the sky, they had some power and were doing an emergency landing when they hit an object on the ground just before touchdown. 2 of the 6 people on the plane survived.
This is just a thought experiment, please don't crucify me:
People tend to think of humans as different from the rest of life on earth. All plants and animals except humans form a natural balance and live in harmony; only humans screw everything up by overpopulating themselves and their livestock while making everything else go extinct.
But what if that's wrong, and humans are no different? After all we have pretty much the same DNA and cellular structure as anything else on the planet. Those wonderful wolves and deer you mentioned are actually like 99% same as us. What if human behavior is the inevitable result of earth-type lifeform? On a cosmic scale, planet earth's biosphere is just a tiny speck. Maybe other types of lifeforms are much better suited for long-term advanced civilization, and planet earth biosphere (DNA based) is an evolutionary dead end. Analogy: earth life = trilobytes. Life on other planets = vertebrates
In actuality the blood plasma was drawn from his gluteus maximus and he was known as the man with the "Golden Ass".
Tom Cruise Missile was legally ruled as a terrorist threat against Scientology. Does that qualify as a precedent?
also you can convert the .pst into html and put it on the company intranet if that's more palatable.
https://www.google.com/webhp?h...
I see. So what you are saying is that there is a large number of skilled engineers and scientists, sitting at home watching TV, while they wait for salaries to go up?
No, they're doing something else in life. Working, teaching, studying, masturbating, whatever. Just not willing to work 80 hours a week for 50k a year.
Job skills and careers aren't things you can acquire and shift around instantly, it takes time. It took decades of abuse to get to this point. If a sensible gov't disbanded H1B program and said "fuck you" to Bill Gates right now, salaries will rise but you're not gonna have a sudden flood of programmers entering the job market. It takes times to make programmers. What you will have is a lot more students interested in CS.
I see what you did there, Taco.
Anyways I seriously doubt we'll be burning fossil fuels as our primary energy source in 2100. This is probably like politicians in 1880 signing a pledge to limit horse emissions before our cities drown in horse poop (a real concern at the time). Nice gesture but rendered moot by later technological advances.
when Fuckedcompany died in 2007, Pud put a notice on the front page.
"Fuckedcompany is.... fucked"
Even in death that site was amusing.
where will the founder explain how it died?
Did you achieve your rank all by yourself, or were there other people you shared your account with?
What is your favorite...
-Game type? (Team Deathmatch, Search and Destroy, etc)
-Loadout
-Perks
Any other comments or stories you'd like to share about your COD experience?
It won't take a lot to achieve critical mass on this. Once people have electric, self-driving cars, the behaviors of the owners (for better or worse) will influence others.
I agree. And I think if a competent self driving car really happens (a big if), that shit will sell itself. A significant percentage of the population will jump at the chance to spend the time driving watching movies or playing games or doing work instead. Also a significant percentage of the population buys/leases a new car frequently (3 year leases are the most common).
Also, if a majority of new cars sold are self-driving, the dynamics of luxury and performance cars will change. Who needs that 500hp turbocharged V-8 when the computer is gonna drive at the speed limit anyways? People will mostly want a quieter cab and smoother ride rather than power and handling.