Assuming it's heading towards the terminal when hit. Unlikely, as aircraft don't take off and land directly towards the terminal.
Do you know for sure that the missile would go straight ahead after being hit by the laser? The text says that the laser disrupts the guidance system, not that it disables the missile guidance completely.
Worst case, it still kills fewer people than a hit on a 767 would.
Smells another assumption which is not necessarily true, isn't it? Anyway my point (besides making a joke) was that it would probably be better to attempt to destroy the missile than to randomly disrupt its movement...
Adapted from military technology, Guardian is designed to detect a missile launch and then direct a laser to the seeker system on the head of the missile and disrupt its guidance signals.
Is it a bird? Is it an airplane? Is it Superman? No, it's a missile crashing into the airport terminal!
And what decent people should do is not buy those laptops if they appear on Ebay. If you give them money for doing it, they will keep doing it... The more people buy "stolen" stuff on Ebay, the more they'll steal.
You were too optimistic on evaluating the correctness of at least your predictions #1 and #2. Regarding #6, Vista has only been launched for corporate users yet...
As mentioned here, it's possible for conservative GC to ignore a whole linked data structure such as a queue, which can be arbitrarily big, just because of a single non-pointer position in memory.
I agree that it's not likely, but I just don't feel good by using such an inelegant and disaster-prone technology in my programs! Maybe I'm irrational, maybe I'm a purist, maybe a bit of both, but I just don't like the idea.
Plus, when I heard that the D programming language uses it, my opinion on the language also decreased.
Doesn't sound neither pretty or optimal from a performance point of view, but regarding those points I admit that it might be good enough.
The real problem might be false negatives: memory containing garbage not getting freed due to something appearing to point at it, without actually being a pointer?
Point granted, even though C and C++ arguably have optional garbage collection as well (if you link to the right library).
I'm not going to check any sources, but aren't those garbage collectors assuming that everything in memory is a pointer? That's a horribly hackish approach, which is of course due to the languages not being designed for garbage collection...
(I might be wrong, I didn't check the state of the art in C garbage collectors before posting)
Rather funnily, CTRL+V often creates problems to me. For example, copying & pasting code has caused me a number of bugs in my programs, either due to:
1- The initial code being wrong and my usage of CTRL+V spreading the mistake around the program. 2- Overlooking things which should be changed in the pasted code
I'm sure you can find some analogies for those mistakes, regarding animals.
Or you could say, "next song" and iTunes would switch to the next song instead of having to click on a button. Wowwie! And what happens when you're sitting at your computer, and you say something to your friend about "the next song in my playlist..." How does it know you don't want to go to the next song?
There are probably many ways to solve this. They could for example, make a "speech command" key in the keyboard which has to be pressed while issuing voice commands. I invented that in 2 seconds of thinking, I'm sure that professional OS designers can do better...
Well, your post sounds very nice, but it raised a few questions in my mind (which you probably won't be able to answer, either due to not knowing the answers or for not wanting to tell them, but...):
1- Were they really artificially limiting the speed of machine on purpose, or did they just find an optimization? 2- If they were limiting the speed, wasn't it due to safety, reliability or whatever? In other words, did the patch decrease the reliability of the machine?
Those are important points, which of course I couldn't glance from your superficial description of the situation, but which would be relevant in evaluating similar situations.
Otherwise the entire industry would just label *everything* Beta and have done with.
No, because another company with Non-BETA software and guarantees of reliability would appear in the market and all those other lame companies would die...
Slashdot Mirror
That's not what I've heard in Al Gore's documentary "An Inconvenient Truth".
I just searched for other sources and I found the following:
http://www.wri.org/climate/newsrelease_text.cfm?N
http://forests.org/articles/reader.asp?linkid=270
http://www.dieselnet.com/standards/us/fe.php
Do you know for sure that the missile would go straight ahead after being hit by the laser? The text says that the laser disrupts the guidance system, not that it disables the missile guidance completely.
Smells another assumption which is not necessarily true, isn't it? Anyway my point (besides making a joke) was that it would probably be better to attempt to destroy the missile than to randomly disrupt its movement...
Is it a bird? Is it an airplane? Is it Superman? No, it's a missile crashing into the airport terminal!
Welcome to the 21st century, it's not Germany anymore...
At least China has some standards on how much liters per km a car can spend, unlike some country which name starts with "United States of America".
Calm down. The guy probably got the joke, and was just pointing out that there is *one* such pair of primes... Nothing bad in my opinion.
And what decent people should do is not buy those laptops if they appear on Ebay. If you give them money for doing it, they will keep doing it... The more people buy "stolen" stuff on Ebay, the more they'll steal.
I'll drink two small beers, you can keep your pint... :P
You were too optimistic on evaluating the correctness of at least your predictions #1 and #2. Regarding #6, Vista has only been launched for corporate users yet...
Oops, page doesn't validate...
In that case, they shouldn't say that you can use a later version either! Why is such a clause about versions needed anyway?
As mentioned here, it's possible for conservative GC to ignore a whole linked data structure such as a queue, which can be arbitrarily big, just because of a single non-pointer position in memory.
I agree that it's not likely, but I just don't feel good by using such an inelegant and disaster-prone technology in my programs! Maybe I'm irrational, maybe I'm a purist, maybe a bit of both, but I just don't like the idea.
Plus, when I heard that the D programming language uses it, my opinion on the language also decreased.
Here is something that I found about this. Not very good news for conservative garbage collection, I say...
Hey hey, calm down. Are you sitting now? Ok, read:
Programming languages are to intended to be used by humans.
You have to wait until powerful AI comes along :)
Doesn't sound neither pretty or optimal from a performance point of view, but regarding those points I admit that it might be good enough.
The real problem might be false negatives: memory containing garbage not getting freed due to something appearing to point at it, without actually being a pointer?
I'm not going to check any sources, but aren't those garbage collectors assuming that everything in memory is a pointer? That's a horribly hackish approach, which is of course due to the languages not being designed for garbage collection...
(I might be wrong, I didn't check the state of the art in C garbage collectors before posting)
On a very positive note, at least someone might learn something from reading the website; specifically, what NOT to do if you value your life.
Rather funnily, CTRL+V often creates problems to me. For example, copying & pasting code has caused me a number of bugs in my programs, either due to:
1- The initial code being wrong and my usage of CTRL+V spreading the mistake around the program.
2- Overlooking things which should be changed in the pasted code
I'm sure you can find some analogies for those mistakes, regarding animals.
There are probably many ways to solve this. They could for example, make a "speech command" key in the keyboard which has to be pressed while issuing voice commands. I invented that in 2 seconds of thinking, I'm sure that professional OS designers can do better...
X <-------- joke
O
|
---
| <-------- you
|
/ \
/ \
Well, your post sounds very nice, but it raised a few questions in my mind (which you probably won't be able to answer, either due to not knowing the answers or for not wanting to tell them, but...):
1- Were they really artificially limiting the speed of machine on purpose, or did they just find an optimization?
2- If they were limiting the speed, wasn't it due to safety, reliability or whatever? In other words, did the patch decrease the reliability of the machine?
Those are important points, which of course I couldn't glance from your superficial description of the situation, but which would be relevant in evaluating similar situations.
No, because another company with Non-BETA software and guarantees of reliability would appear in the market and all those other lame companies would die...
What do you think the NSA is for? ;)
You can choose not to receive mod points (or you can just not use them, noone forces you).