"The average temperature in the United States has risen rapidly and drastically since 1980, and recent decades have been the warmest of the past 1,500 years"
Ok, and there were glaciers down to what like Ohio less than 10,000 years ago. Pretty sure humans had nothing to do with the warming of the last 9900 years, where is the evidence that we affected the last 100 years of warming? (Hint: CO2 levels are flat if you don't cherry pick the historical data). What would the temperature rise be without humanity? Unless you can show me the science that explains the non AGW of the last 10,000 years, you don't really have a case for AGW at all. The globe gets warmer and cooler and has since it formed, life goes on.
Downmodding or calling me names does not validate AGW, just an FYI to all my friends in the pro AGW side of the fence.
a) None of that means it's OK to dump billions of tonnes of CO2 into the air. b) CO2 levels are NOT flat - check your facts. c) Greenhouse gases aren't difficult to understand, it's basic science. d) WRT point c, human greenhouse gas production ties nicely with both the predicted and the observed sharp temperature rise in the last few decades.
Actually, totally public financial transactions would be really interesting. I mean, you still need some way of signing them, but you don't need end-to-end encryption per se. There's this bitcoin thing based on that concept.
Yep, and the entire bitcoin network can only handle about seven transactions per second because of this openness.
(this is a network that uses 500 megawatts of electricity).
Because humans don't have heart attacks while driving.
Because humans don't Drive While Old.
Because humans don't drive while pissed off.
Short version: I don't care how many fucking people the driverless cars kill, they can't possibly be worse than humans.
Better: The car will have a complete log of why it killed somebody and the error can be corrected and all other cars updated. Try doing that with humans.
I'd deploy a simple lightweight mirror on a retractable arm that would track the location of the ship and position the mirror such that from the ship's perspective
Are you saying that the mirror would be big enough to completely shield the drone? If so, no it wouldn't work. If not, then you can't completely shield the drone.
With a bit of modification this plan might work. Use a mirror (or retroreflective surface) to reflect the laser back to the ship that fired it. Start fires, blind any US sailors that happen to be looking in that general direction.
No, the drones won't survive very long but they're cheap to build if that's all they need to do. You could fly in a swarm of them with each missile you send. They'll soon turn the laser off.
The reflective surface does not need to reflect the entire spectrum just the wavelength(s) of the laser.
I understand that, but it needs to reflect the vast majority of the incoming energy or else the imperfections in the surface are going to be fatal flaws.
It all depends on how continuous the laser beam is. The weapon might fire in short pulses (likely - they say it costs "$1 a shot to fire"). Also: tracking hardware isn't perfect. A fast moving object at a distance won't be subject to a continuous beam anyway. A reflective coating could provide a lot of protection.
IOW the navy is likely engaging in FUD and overstating the capabilities of this system. It works against existing tech, it won't work very well if said tech is polished a bit more. Potential for collateral damage is huge.
Well... a) You demonstrated how easy it is to do but b) You didn't measure insulin
That's why restaurants like to start you off with bread while you're perusing the menu. It ain't just being hospitable. They want your blood sugar to be plummeting when you order.
Oh, sure. It's a worldwide secret conspiracy that none of the customers even know about or suspect.
Slashdot Mirror
What's really needed is a version of Firefox that doesn't use so much fucking memory that we need a 64-bit version.
With two slashdot tabs open my Firefox is current using 700Mb of memory.
Yes, I just restarted it. Before the restart it was 1.5Gb for those same two pages.
I installed the 64-bit version a few months ago when the 32-bit version finally became completely unusable for basic web browsing.
PS: Google Chrome is better, but not much - 500Mb. IE can do it in a "mere" 200Mb. WTF happened to 'coding'?
That's all well and good but the transmitter needs to be very powerful.
How are the crystal transmitters coming along?
It's already here!
uBeam technologies have that one solved and will be launching a product any day now.
Interesting article on bit coins.
They've finally decided to make a coin for the American unit of currency commonly called a "bit"?
"The average temperature in the United States has risen rapidly and drastically since 1980, and recent decades have been the warmest of the past 1,500 years"
Ok, and there were glaciers down to what like Ohio less than 10,000 years ago. Pretty sure humans had nothing to do with the warming of the last 9900 years, where is the evidence that we affected the last 100 years of warming? (Hint: CO2 levels are flat if you don't cherry pick the historical data). What would the temperature rise be without humanity? Unless you can show me the science that explains the non AGW of the last 10,000 years, you don't really have a case for AGW at all. The globe gets warmer and cooler and has since it formed, life goes on.
Downmodding or calling me names does not validate AGW, just an FYI to all my friends in the pro AGW side of the fence.
a) None of that means it's OK to dump billions of tonnes of CO2 into the air.
b) CO2 levels are NOT flat - check your facts.
c) Greenhouse gases aren't difficult to understand, it's basic science.
d) WRT point c, human greenhouse gas production ties nicely with both the predicted and the observed sharp temperature rise in the last few decades.
Won't electric cars use mostly regenerative braking in cities, making this point moot?
Meh. Third world problems.
Actually, totally public financial transactions would be really interesting. I mean, you still need some way of signing them, but you don't need end-to-end encryption per se. There's this bitcoin thing based on that concept.
Yep, and the entire bitcoin network can only handle about seven transactions per second because of this openness.
(this is a network that uses 500 megawatts of electricity).
If only there was a way to fix a thin piece of protective material to a screen. Something replaceable.
Yep. He doesn't need to worry. The way they drive drive means a lot more advances in AI are needed before any Indian jobs will be in danger.
I dunno. It might be easier to, ummmm, let's see.... warm them up.
Nah, you'd need an electricity supply for that!
Oh, wait...
(facepalm)
The best 3D movie I've ever seen wasn't even shot in 3D, it was postprocessed to add it afterwards: Titanic.
Go figure.
I guess you're going to have to sit down for this, but:
There are some movies that hit Netflix before they hit theaters.
C'mon, didn't Trump give someone an ugly look or fart during a meeting or something? Someone go check wapo.com.
No, but it would be a good idea to call the next one "Trump".
Nobody's going to be calling their kids "Trump" anytime soon.
Everybody here is missing the other point: This global transparency ensures that people know their tax money "goes to something reasonable"
It totally keeps the rich, the government, etc., in check.
wrong
Right!
Does he arrive on Friday and go home on Monday?
Because humans don't drink/drive.
Because humans don't fall asleep at the wheel.
Because humans don't text when driving.
Because humans don't have heart attacks while driving.
Because humans don't Drive While Old.
Because humans don't drive while pissed off.
Short version: I don't care how many fucking people the driverless cars kill, they can't possibly be worse than humans.
Better: The car will have a complete log of why it killed somebody and the error can be corrected and all other cars updated. Try doing that with humans.
...we move to more profitable coins as they come out.
I think I see a flaw in this cunning plan.
I'd deploy a simple lightweight mirror on a retractable arm that would track the location of the ship and position the mirror such that from the ship's perspective
Are you saying that the mirror would be big enough to completely shield the drone? If so, no it wouldn't work. If not, then you can't completely shield the drone.
With a bit of modification this plan might work. Use a mirror (or retroreflective surface) to reflect the laser back to the ship that fired it. Start fires, blind any US sailors that happen to be looking in that general direction.
No, the drones won't survive very long but they're cheap to build if that's all they need to do. You could fly in a swarm of them with each missile you send. They'll soon turn the laser off.
Missiles normally move quite fast.
The reflective surface does not need to reflect the entire spectrum just the wavelength(s) of the laser.
I understand that, but it needs to reflect the vast majority of the incoming energy or else the imperfections in the surface are going to be fatal flaws.
It all depends on how continuous the laser beam is.
The weapon might fire in short pulses (likely - they say it costs "$1 a shot to fire"). Also: tracking hardware isn't perfect. A fast moving object at a distance won't be subject to a continuous beam anyway. A reflective coating could provide a lot of protection.
IOW the navy is likely engaging in FUD and overstating the capabilities of this system. It works against existing tech, it won't work very well if said tech is polished a bit more. Potential for collateral damage is huge.
You don't directly pay for any of this.
Well, so long as we only pay indirectly then I guess it's perfectly OK.
Well...
a) You demonstrated how easy it is to do
but
b) You didn't measure insulin
That's why restaurants like to start you off with bread while you're perusing the menu. It ain't just being hospitable. They want your blood sugar to be plummeting when you order.
Oh, sure. It's a worldwide secret conspiracy that none of the customers even know about or suspect.
They kill more than 4x the number of civilians than total police killed by civilians..
Yet there's far more citizens than police.
Conclusion: The civilians are undertrained.