That's true...but if simply replacing the skins is all it took to convert a non-stealthy aircraft into a stealthy one, I would imagine we would be busy retrofitting every airplane in service. Or, to put it differently, to create a truly stealthy aircraft, you use a combination of techniques, such as using radar absorbent materials and paints on the skin *AND* shaping to disperse, rather than concentrate, the radio energy that *is* reflected by the skins.
It's the people who have spent their entire lives as upper/ruling class, and who are surrounded with others who provide complex rationalizations for killing, the people who eventually enact the legislation, framework, and power to compel the people at the end of the chain to commit those acts...It's those at the top, who ceased viewing people as valuable and instead view them as a means to an end.
You mean, the people who use terms like "collateral damage?" Yeah, I'm with you. My first thought on reading this headline was, "Awesome. Let's invent yet more ways to kill each other." Don't get me wrong; I'm certainly not a pacifist. I would have absolutely no qualms about pulling the trigger if someone were to break into my home, threatening my family, for example. I don't even have a problem with a standing military force to protect our nation's borders against anyone who would seek to invade the U.S. I have a serious problem, however, with our current tendency to invade sovereign nations, send in drones to attack areas where we think "terrorists" might be hiding -- and seeing how that term has been misused here at home, I shudder to think how broadly that definition might be applied in Pakistan...who, in theory at least, is our frigging ALLY -- and I really, really have a problem with how we shrug off the claims that drone strikes have killed a disproportionate number of civilians in the war on terror.
As a kid, that used to be one of my favorite airplanes. Aesthetically, I still think it is one of the coolest airplanes ever designed. Military aircraft, however, should always be designed with the mantra, "form follows function" in mind. As sweet as the XB-70 was, there's no way for it to be functional in the modern age. That airplane has got to have a radar cross section approximating an aircraft carrier or maybe even a small moon with all those right angles everywhere.
There are exemptions for "charitable organizations" which would cover Angel Flights and similar organizations -- and also for volunteering to fly political candidates, go figure:) I don't have time to look up the relevant FAR right now (I'm getting ready for work), but I'll see if I can find it in a couple of hours.
If you are cynical about Rep. Cissna's change of heart, you should hear how Sen. Nick Begich flip-flopped on the issue (warning: shameless plug to my blog). In fairness, we don't know Rep. Cissna's stance before her run-in with TSA in Seattle...but Begich basically told me I was wrong (diplomatically, of course) before Rep. Cissna's encounter, and then publicly criticized TSA (again, diplomatically) after Rep. Cissna took a stand on the issue. Besides, I'd rather someone have a come-to-Jesus experience and finally see the light than take a wrong stand and stick to it.
...if you take the AlCan (Hint: tourists really shouldn't be attempting that)
Why? I've driven the AlCan three times, and there's no comparison between the last trip (2004ish) and the first (1989). It's not a great road in places, but most of it really isn't bad at all -- and there is some absolutely stunning scenery along the way. It is kind of a long drive admittedly, and you'll probably burn most of your vacation time just driving the AlCan, so your visit to Alaska will probably be quite a bit shorter than it would be if you flew, however.
Two comments. First, do you really mean "AK" (Alaska) or do you mean "AR" (Arkansas)? 'Cause while we would certainly feel the hurt in Alaska (there's no other way to get to a lot of the state, and getting to the lower-48 really sucks if you don't fly -- ask me how I know, stupid effing TSA...), I doubt it would hurt most of the rest of the country very much. Second, it would be really interesting to see how the "no fly" zones worked out in practice. Would it *really* mean that no airliners traverse the airspace above the states, or would it just mean that no airlines arrive at or depart from that state? The former would have a significant impact to air travel across the country, but the latter...not so much.
Once you arrive at the airport, however, that is interstate travel. A very different beast, and one that is not a protected power of the federal government.
Not to mention that you are assuming that the travel is interstate. My home state of Alaska is big enough that quite a lot of flying is done within the state itself, and in many cases, that's the ONLY reasonable way to get from point A to point B. For example, I live in Anchorage. My job is managing a network 500 miles west in the village of Bethel. There are no roads between Anchorage and Bethel, so the only way to get from here to there is by airplane or by boat...and in winter, you can't even get there by boat. Also, what about the possibility of flying from a particular state into a foreign country without landing in -- or even overflying -- a second state? Does that meet the legal definition of "interstate?"
You can wish that all of the Sharon Cissna's across the country have to endure TSA if you want, but quite frankly, I'll gladly accept her help in reigning in TSA (or more accurately, "I'll gladly do whatever I can to help her reign in TSA.").
I *do* own an airplane, so let me answer some of these questions for you.
If I want to take my friend Bob up in my Cessna...
Correct -- as long as you are not providing certain types of flight instruction (they want to know about students working on an initial pilot's license and certain advanced ratings like, IIRC, multi-engine), TSA doesn't care about flying a friend around for the fun of it.
Now, what if Bob pays me $50 to take him from one place to another...What if I make a point of giving anybody who pays me $50 a ride in my airplane?
TSA might not become involved, but the FAA would (if they found out). You see, the FAA doesn't allow just anybody to charge fees to fly someone around. General Aviation -- what most people think of when they think "Cessna" or "Piper" -- comes in several flavors. When you first become a licensed pilot, you get a "private pilot" license, a "sport pilot" license or a "recreational pilot" license. There are a number of differences in what you can do with each of these licenses, but they are similar enough to group them together for this discussion. Basically, these licenses allow you to fly your airplane for fun, but not for profit...and the FAA is very, very serious and very, very conservative in how they approach the meaning of "fun but not profit." In a nutshell, if you were going on a flight and you decided to invite a friend, you are PROBABLY (but not certainly) okay. However, if your friend comes to you with a request to go flying...well, don't let the FAA find out (they have busted pilots for receiving no more compensation than logging the flight time!). Even with a "commercial pilot" license (what I have) or an "airline transport pilot" ("ATP") license, unless you jump through a lot more hoops, THE EXACT SAME RESTRICTIONS APPLY. "General Aviation" is covered under Part 91 of the Federal Aviation Regulations. If you are flying under Part 91, you can't carry passengers or cargo for hire although you can provide flight instruction...if you also hold a flight instructor certificate. I have known of instructors providing "flight instruction" to scenic locations, but you're seriously bending the regs if you try that, so be careful. If you want to legally carry passengers or cargo, you need to become licensed as an air taxi operator (Part 135) or a scheduled airline (Part 141). That's far, far easier said than done, and at that point, TSA will become involved.
What if I have a bigger airplane...
Unlike what your wife or girlfriend may have told you, size doesn't matter, at least not yet;) A few years ago, TSA tried to mandate passenger screening for all aircraft weighing over 12,500 lbs. (what the FAA calls a "large" airplane). There was enough public outrage, notably from the National Business Aviation Association and the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association, that they withdrew that proposal. They've made some noise about revisiting that topic again, but so far, that's all it has been -- just noise.
What most people don't realize, however, is that the 10th Amendment was effectively rendered null and void in 1865. Most people think the Civil War was about slavery, but it wasn't. While slavery was the issue du jour over which the Fed and the states were in dispute, the REAL issue was whether the Federal Government had the authority to overrule the individual states. The Tenth Amendment, as you correctly stated, said "No -- states rights trump Federal law." Unfortunately, the Fed decided to ignore that pesky little detail in a bid to outlaw slavery. Their intentions were good -- slavery is, without a doubt, an abhorrent, barbaric practice -- but the downside of the Civil War was that the Federal government became far more powerful than the Founding Fathers ever intended, usurping the authority of state governments in direct violation of the 10th Amendment. So technically, you are correct...but that tends not to be the way things actually play out in real life.
Although I don't know how well OpenLDAP handled replication -- the 'many servers' part...
OpenLDAP handled replication in two different ways. Older OpenLDAP servers used a separate daemon ("slurpd") to handle replication. IME, it worked pretty well. New OpenLDAP servers...well, it's pretty much just voodoo*, but it seems to work, too <shrug>
*Okay, it's not really voodoo, but I haven't spent the time to figure it all out yet. I believe it's more a network of peers than the older master/slave server configuration, but I don't completely understand all the details of how they communicate updates with each other.
My brother married a woman shortly after graduating from boot camp. Fast forward two or three years, they are separated and filing for divorce when she tells him she's pregnant. She's been two states away for a month or two, so he gets the DNA paternity test done. Doctor says there's about a 70% chance it's not his kid. Judge says, "Find out whose kid it is, and I'll let you off the hook for child support." Good luck with that -- she's not gonna admit she's been sleeping around, so my brother was S.O.L. I think he's only got another ten or so years left on child support for that kid. Oh, did I mention that since he had adopted the two kids she had from a previous marriage, he was paying child support for them, too?
The truth is that by the year 2100, speculative theories will be so advanced and so reliably misguided that we'll be able to calculate anything and solve any social problem simply by asking futurists a question and assuming the opposite.
You can also blind a CCTV camera with a towel or a brick...
Clearly, towels and bricks are tools used by terrorists and pedophiles everywhere. Therefore, we must outlaw all towels and bricks! You don't want to enable the terrorists and pedophiles, do you?
I was trying to be funny (guess I failed, lol), but in all honesty, yes, I've seen people behave otherwise myself. My dad, for one. Hopefully, my daughter will say that about me too, one of these days. Most of my friends also value commitment and that which is honorable and true, since those are the kind of people I prefer to associate with.
20 years to increase from $36 to $120/hr. That's a factor of 3.33 over 20 years or an annual growth rate of 6%.
That's true. However, I can compress that time span a bit, though (should have thought of that earlier). I was a flight instructor here in town in 1999. We were the most expensive place in town, at $50/hour, for that same airplane. Everyone else in town was about $40 per hour. I had a falling out with my boss, got fired, and went into IT. About a year and a half later, I went to another flight school in town to get current again, and a 152 was renting for $85 an hour, roughly doubling in price from July of '99 to January of '01. It's climbed incrementally from there to the current $120/hour rate.
Okay, food and clothing...I'd probably have to concede that point. I haven't noticed prices rising that much. That doesn't mean they haven't, just that I haven't noticed it, so since I can't argue that point, I'll concede. Ditto for building supplies. Regarding appliances and furniture...I'd say they've increased, but not by the same factor that I gave in my examples above.
Bicycles, however...gotta disagree with you there. I bought a Diamondback Outlook less than ten years ago for under $300. It's not a high-end bike like a Cannondale or Giant or K2, but for an affordable consumer bike, it's pretty decent. Last summer I went to look for a similar bike for my wife, and even though I went to the same store, there was nothing anywhere near the quality of my Diamondback for under $400, and even at that price, the pickings were a bit sketchy. Just to be clear, there wasn't anything at that price point at any other stores either, unless you wanted to buy the Wal-Mart no-name special. Almost twenty years ago, you could pick up a high-end recreational bike for around the same price (about $500) as the decent quality consumer bikes I was looking for last summer. There's also been a pretty steep price increase on motor vehicles lately. A 2009 V-Strom listed just north of $7000 when I was shopping for one; the 2012 model books at $8299. In 2007, a Nissan Frontier SE King Cab ran $21K in my neck of the woods; when I last had my vehicle serviced, a comparable model was about $10K more.
Slashdot Mirror
That's true...but if simply replacing the skins is all it took to convert a non-stealthy aircraft into a stealthy one, I would imagine we would be busy retrofitting every airplane in service. Or, to put it differently, to create a truly stealthy aircraft, you use a combination of techniques, such as using radar absorbent materials and paints on the skin *AND* shaping to disperse, rather than concentrate, the radio energy that *is* reflected by the skins.
Couple of days, couple of hours...anyway, here's the citation for the "charitable flights" exemption: 91.146 Passenger-carrying flights for the benefit of a charitable, nonprofit, or community event.
I was waiting for that reply. You, sir, did not disappoint :)
It's the people who have spent their entire lives as upper/ruling class, and who are surrounded with others who provide complex rationalizations for killing, the people who eventually enact the legislation, framework, and power to compel the people at the end of the chain to commit those acts...It's those at the top, who ceased viewing people as valuable and instead view them as a means to an end.
You mean, the people who use terms like "collateral damage?" Yeah, I'm with you. My first thought on reading this headline was, "Awesome. Let's invent yet more ways to kill each other." Don't get me wrong; I'm certainly not a pacifist. I would have absolutely no qualms about pulling the trigger if someone were to break into my home, threatening my family, for example. I don't even have a problem with a standing military force to protect our nation's borders against anyone who would seek to invade the U.S. I have a serious problem, however, with our current tendency to invade sovereign nations, send in drones to attack areas where we think "terrorists" might be hiding -- and seeing how that term has been misused here at home, I shudder to think how broadly that definition might be applied in Pakistan...who, in theory at least, is our frigging ALLY -- and I really, really have a problem with how we shrug off the claims that drone strikes have killed a disproportionate number of civilians in the war on terror.
As a kid, that used to be one of my favorite airplanes. Aesthetically, I still think it is one of the coolest airplanes ever designed. Military aircraft, however, should always be designed with the mantra, "form follows function" in mind. As sweet as the XB-70 was, there's no way for it to be functional in the modern age. That airplane has got to have a radar cross section approximating an aircraft carrier or maybe even a small moon with all those right angles everywhere.
[...] the nav system is to die because of.
That appears to be un uncited FTFY. If so, then Grammar Nazi fail.
"Of" is also a preposition.
My boss would probably be totally cool with that, since he's already a homebrewer. Hmmm...might have to schedule a "training session" sometime :)
There are exemptions for "charitable organizations" which would cover Angel Flights and similar organizations -- and also for volunteering to fly political candidates, go figure :) I don't have time to look up the relevant FAR right now (I'm getting ready for work), but I'll see if I can find it in a couple of hours.
No, that just makes you want to commit suicide. It doesn't actually help you accomplish the task ;)
If you are cynical about Rep. Cissna's change of heart, you should hear how Sen. Nick Begich flip-flopped on the issue (warning: shameless plug to my blog). In fairness, we don't know Rep. Cissna's stance before her run-in with TSA in Seattle...but Begich basically told me I was wrong (diplomatically, of course) before Rep. Cissna's encounter, and then publicly criticized TSA (again, diplomatically) after Rep. Cissna took a stand on the issue. Besides, I'd rather someone have a come-to-Jesus experience and finally see the light than take a wrong stand and stick to it.
...if you take the AlCan (Hint: tourists really shouldn't be attempting that)
Why? I've driven the AlCan three times, and there's no comparison between the last trip (2004ish) and the first (1989). It's not a great road in places, but most of it really isn't bad at all -- and there is some absolutely stunning scenery along the way. It is kind of a long drive admittedly, and you'll probably burn most of your vacation time just driving the AlCan, so your visit to Alaska will probably be quite a bit shorter than it would be if you flew, however.
Two comments. First, do you really mean "AK" (Alaska) or do you mean "AR" (Arkansas)? 'Cause while we would certainly feel the hurt in Alaska (there's no other way to get to a lot of the state, and getting to the lower-48 really sucks if you don't fly -- ask me how I know, stupid effing TSA...), I doubt it would hurt most of the rest of the country very much. Second, it would be really interesting to see how the "no fly" zones worked out in practice. Would it *really* mean that no airliners traverse the airspace above the states, or would it just mean that no airlines arrive at or depart from that state? The former would have a significant impact to air travel across the country, but the latter...not so much.
Once you arrive at the airport, however, that is interstate travel. A very different beast, and one that is not a protected power of the federal government.
Not to mention that you are assuming that the travel is interstate. My home state of Alaska is big enough that quite a lot of flying is done within the state itself, and in many cases, that's the ONLY reasonable way to get from point A to point B. For example, I live in Anchorage. My job is managing a network 500 miles west in the village of Bethel. There are no roads between Anchorage and Bethel, so the only way to get from here to there is by airplane or by boat...and in winter, you can't even get there by boat. Also, what about the possibility of flying from a particular state into a foreign country without landing in -- or even overflying -- a second state? Does that meet the legal definition of "interstate?"
"The enemy of my enemy is my friend."
You can wish that all of the Sharon Cissna's across the country have to endure TSA if you want, but quite frankly, I'll gladly accept her help in reigning in TSA (or more accurately, "I'll gladly do whatever I can to help her reign in TSA.").
If I want to take my friend Bob up in my Cessna...
Correct -- as long as you are not providing certain types of flight instruction (they want to know about students working on an initial pilot's license and certain advanced ratings like, IIRC, multi-engine), TSA doesn't care about flying a friend around for the fun of it.
Now, what if Bob pays me $50 to take him from one place to another...What if I make a point of giving anybody who pays me $50 a ride in my airplane?
TSA might not become involved, but the FAA would (if they found out). You see, the FAA doesn't allow just anybody to charge fees to fly someone around. General Aviation -- what most people think of when they think "Cessna" or "Piper" -- comes in several flavors. When you first become a licensed pilot, you get a "private pilot" license, a "sport pilot" license or a "recreational pilot" license. There are a number of differences in what you can do with each of these licenses, but they are similar enough to group them together for this discussion. Basically, these licenses allow you to fly your airplane for fun, but not for profit...and the FAA is very, very serious and very, very conservative in how they approach the meaning of "fun but not profit." In a nutshell, if you were going on a flight and you decided to invite a friend, you are PROBABLY (but not certainly) okay. However, if your friend comes to you with a request to go flying...well, don't let the FAA find out (they have busted pilots for receiving no more compensation than logging the flight time!). Even with a "commercial pilot" license (what I have) or an "airline transport pilot" ("ATP") license, unless you jump through a lot more hoops, THE EXACT SAME RESTRICTIONS APPLY . "General Aviation" is covered under Part 91 of the Federal Aviation Regulations. If you are flying under Part 91, you can't carry passengers or cargo for hire although you can provide flight instruction...if you also hold a flight instructor certificate. I have known of instructors providing "flight instruction" to scenic locations, but you're seriously bending the regs if you try that, so be careful. If you want to legally carry passengers or cargo, you need to become licensed as an air taxi operator (Part 135) or a scheduled airline (Part 141). That's far, far easier said than done, and at that point, TSA will become involved.
What if I have a bigger airplane...
Unlike what your wife or girlfriend may have told you, size doesn't matter, at least not yet ;) A few years ago, TSA tried to mandate passenger screening for all aircraft weighing over 12,500 lbs. (what the FAA calls a "large" airplane). There was enough public outrage, notably from the National Business Aviation Association and the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association, that they withdrew that proposal. They've made some noise about revisiting that topic again, but so far, that's all it has been -- just noise.
HTH!
What most people don't realize, however, is that the 10th Amendment was effectively rendered null and void in 1865. Most people think the Civil War was about slavery, but it wasn't. While slavery was the issue du jour over which the Fed and the states were in dispute, the REAL issue was whether the Federal Government had the authority to overrule the individual states. The Tenth Amendment, as you correctly stated, said "No -- states rights trump Federal law." Unfortunately, the Fed decided to ignore that pesky little detail in a bid to outlaw slavery. Their intentions were good -- slavery is, without a doubt, an abhorrent, barbaric practice -- but the downside of the Civil War was that the Federal government became far more powerful than the Founding Fathers ever intended, usurping the authority of state governments in direct violation of the 10th Amendment. So technically, you are correct...but that tends not to be the way things actually play out in real life.
If you spend 20 minutes to RTFM and think before you start shoveling data at the server, SQL wins every time.
Um, no. There are times when all you need is a simple data store. For that, SQL is overkill and a key-value hash is perfect.
Although I don't know how well OpenLDAP handled replication -- the 'many servers' part ...
OpenLDAP handled replication in two different ways. Older OpenLDAP servers used a separate daemon ("slurpd") to handle replication. IME, it worked pretty well. New OpenLDAP servers...well, it's pretty much just voodoo*, but it seems to work, too <shrug>
*Okay, it's not really voodoo, but I haven't spent the time to figure it all out yet. I believe it's more a network of peers than the older master/slave server configuration, but I don't completely understand all the details of how they communicate updates with each other.
My brother married a woman shortly after graduating from boot camp. Fast forward two or three years, they are separated and filing for divorce when she tells him she's pregnant. She's been two states away for a month or two, so he gets the DNA paternity test done. Doctor says there's about a 70% chance it's not his kid. Judge says, "Find out whose kid it is, and I'll let you off the hook for child support." Good luck with that -- she's not gonna admit she's been sleeping around, so my brother was S.O.L. I think he's only got another ten or so years left on child support for that kid. Oh, did I mention that since he had adopted the two kids she had from a previous marriage, he was paying child support for them, too?
The truth is that by the year 2100, speculative theories will be so advanced and so reliably misguided that we'll be able to calculate anything and solve any social problem simply by asking futurists a question and assuming the opposite.
Well played indeed, madame :)
Keep on rockin' in the free world! (with apologies to Neil Young)
sigh...
You can also blind a CCTV camera with a towel or a brick...
Clearly, towels and bricks are tools used by terrorists and pedophiles everywhere. Therefore, we must outlaw all towels and bricks! You don't want to enable the terrorists and pedophiles, do you?
I was trying to be funny (guess I failed, lol), but in all honesty, yes, I've seen people behave otherwise myself. My dad, for one. Hopefully, my daughter will say that about me too, one of these days. Most of my friends also value commitment and that which is honorable and true, since those are the kind of people I prefer to associate with.
20 years to increase from $36 to $120/hr. That's a factor of 3.33 over 20 years or an annual growth rate of 6%.
That's true. However, I can compress that time span a bit, though (should have thought of that earlier). I was a flight instructor here in town in 1999. We were the most expensive place in town, at $50/hour, for that same airplane. Everyone else in town was about $40 per hour. I had a falling out with my boss, got fired, and went into IT. About a year and a half later, I went to another flight school in town to get current again, and a 152 was renting for $85 an hour, roughly doubling in price from July of '99 to January of '01. It's climbed incrementally from there to the current $120/hour rate.
Okay, food and clothing...I'd probably have to concede that point. I haven't noticed prices rising that much. That doesn't mean they haven't, just that I haven't noticed it, so since I can't argue that point, I'll concede. Ditto for building supplies. Regarding appliances and furniture...I'd say they've increased, but not by the same factor that I gave in my examples above.
Bicycles, however...gotta disagree with you there. I bought a Diamondback Outlook less than ten years ago for under $300. It's not a high-end bike like a Cannondale or Giant or K2, but for an affordable consumer bike, it's pretty decent. Last summer I went to look for a similar bike for my wife, and even though I went to the same store, there was nothing anywhere near the quality of my Diamondback for under $400, and even at that price, the pickings were a bit sketchy. Just to be clear, there wasn't anything at that price point at any other stores either, unless you wanted to buy the Wal-Mart no-name special. Almost twenty years ago, you could pick up a high-end recreational bike for around the same price (about $500) as the decent quality consumer bikes I was looking for last summer. There's also been a pretty steep price increase on motor vehicles lately. A 2009 V-Strom listed just north of $7000 when I was shopping for one; the 2012 model books at $8299. In 2007, a Nissan Frontier SE King Cab ran $21K in my neck of the woods; when I last had my vehicle serviced, a comparable model was about $10K more.