1. Increase global energy costs by a factor of 5-10, crippling economies of most nations. Force airlines to scrap ground existing fleets and purchase replacements, causing fare increases of 200-500%, and then refit the existing fleet with more efficient, expensive, and lower performance engines, both increasing flight times and continuing fare increases. Rapidly build high speed train routes at astronomical costs, increasing rail fares commensurately. And then compel freight carriers to purchase battery EV trucks at great expense and with and marginal performance, reducing service and capacity, in creasing costs of most goods. These to be fed by local wind/solar storage at even higher energy costs since subsidies cannot be provided within a collapsing economy. We know we can do this, we just have to accept the diminished standard of living and loss of mobility, and the enriching of the suppliers of this technology.
2. Reduce heating/cooling in buildings. Efficiency. There's most of your energy use. Renovate, at great expense, existing structures to incorporate passive solar design, put solar cells on roofs so long as these are available, and promote the use shades and ceiling fans that we have and are already doing as we have for half a century, despite the redundancy of promoting this. Just expire tax subsidies and exemptions for buildings that don't do this, phasing them out 10 percent a year and causing the wholesale razing and replacement as these 'substandard' structures are legislated out of existence.
3. There is no 3. steps 1 and 2 are certain to accomplish one of the goals of climate change alarmists - destruction or minimization of the industrialized world, and the commensurate punishment of those who enjoyed the standard of living made possible by profligate, in the opinion of these activists, consumption.
What would be a third role for a 1-2 seat Jet aircraft without a cargo bay? Oh, bomber, if you don't need much capacity.
I don't think of the A-6 as a fighter. Not does the F-104 seem to be much of a ground attack craft. It may not be difficult, but true air superiority fighters are nor automatically also serviceable ground attack craft, and some were never multi role
That is exactly how to fight a theater air superiority battle.
Bring in low-observable aircraft and elicit a missle launch. ECM/maneuvers to survive, hopefully. Loitering anti-radar aircraft target the missle site and hopefully the control site(s). Ground probes monitor and report on communications traffic and identify transmitters. More anti-radiation missles on the way. Enemy loses its ability to command SAMs. Ground assaults now only deal with handheld or small arms/AAA. Profit. ; Most likely the modern battlefield, be it air or ground, will see C&C denial the key to victory. Jamming, countermeasures, selective obfuscation, usurpation, spoofing.
The Islamofacists will not trust tech enough to be defeated by this. They will, however, learn to fight the cyber battle against their enemies. Us first-world combatants will keep trying to out-tech them, and end up using overwhelming force. And raising another generation of fascists with a more convenient excuse for murder than just hating everyone else.
A lot of those execs founded their own ventures, and a lot of them bought IBM stuff.
Of course, he also let go a lot of people who did nothing. I worked for a man at the time who had to deal with the do nothings, No love lost when they were gone.
I work for a S&P 500 financial corporation. I've been here through multiple major layoffs, one a 10% global layoff, the other a 20% global layoff. One in response to the unpleasantness in 2008-9, the other in response to business decisions to refocus and drive growth by investing in new markets and new products, necessitating divesting and letting a lot of good people go that simply did not do what was needed at the time.
It's a familiar and trite complaint that layoffs serve the C-level exclusively, but I can easily see Microsoft choosing to remove distractions, reduce current expenses, and even take the opportunity to shake the tree and rid itself of (real or imagined) low-hanging underperformers.
IBM did this repeatedly, and is still doing it, as large corporations regularly have to sift their work force and reset priorities, UNLESS they are consistently evaluating their strategies, have truly strategic planning that looks beyond the horizon, and work from a position of true knowledge of their business and performance. Microsoft is regularly accused of failed strategy and poor performance. And they can certainly be accused of being too big to be well managed, especially in the eyes of the minions who live with the decisions.
Microsoft's market(s) is(are) difficult places to predict performance. Intangibles rule in that space, and failure is the norm. Success if fleeting. Windows is Microsoft's bedrock, so as the marketplace starts to embrace nontraditional devices that need not use Windows, Microsoft should be looking beyond traditional and on to emerging opportunities. Can they move quickly enough to outflank competitors? Google is huge, but acts like a startup on specific projects. From my viewpoint, Kinect is the last Microsoft project that could be described as nimble. There are some interesting things they show off, but none yet ready for a product. Surface is just not floating anyone's boat yet. Nokia was dead on arrival, so losing that is admitting they could not resuscitate it with Windows Phone, the poster child for losing the traditional to the nontraditional. Ask me some time about my new set top box, running Microsoft Mediaroom, and closed captioning. At least Microsoft left this in marginally perfect state, but another idea they had to abandon.
I raised $1800 for my first Turbo XT clone with a yard sale. Dual 5 1/4 floppies, 20MB HD, 8MHz CPU, 640K RAM, CGA baby!
It got updated to 3.5 HD floppies, 40MB drive, then out the door in 2 years and on to 286s, 386SX, blah blah blah. I paid a lot to be bleeding edge right up to Pentium 90s. After that I slowed down, and still run a Core 2 Duo at home that does Windows 8.1 very, very well.
My 3D Printer experiment will be a home made something, probably a GMax clone or similar beam frame kit. I need not pay all that retail, and I may buy a used Printrbot Simple which I see pretty regular. I can always resell it or scavenge parts.
No, notion that somehow I disagree that they're monopolies, and that somehow i rationalize against emergence of competition like charter schools. I not only do NOT, but I'm very much interested in alternatives to our failED public school system nationwide.
My comment about unions being corporations was informed by the reality that many unions are effectively subcontractors to trucking, contstruction, technology companies. Teachers unions fit this mold, though they and school systems would probably argue that.
Somehow you seem to think I'm not a lifelong conservative, steeped in capitalism, clinging to the hope that our Nation can somehow leverage our Constitution and sa be out nation from this president. Please reconsider your opinion of me.
Slashdot Mirror
We don't use oil to generate electricity, we use gas. Solar is not cheaper than gas.
Take away solar subsidies and it gets to the point the alarmists want. Deprivation.
1. Increase global energy costs by a factor of 5-10, crippling economies of most nations. Force airlines to scrap ground existing fleets and purchase replacements, causing fare increases of 200-500%, and then refit the existing fleet with more efficient, expensive, and lower performance engines, both increasing flight times and continuing fare increases. Rapidly build high speed train routes at astronomical costs, increasing rail fares commensurately. And then compel freight carriers to purchase battery EV trucks at great expense and with and marginal performance, reducing service and capacity, in creasing costs of most goods. These to be fed by local wind/solar storage at even higher energy costs since subsidies cannot be provided within a collapsing economy. We know we can do this, we just have to accept the diminished standard of living and loss of mobility, and the enriching of the suppliers of this technology.
2. Reduce heating/cooling in buildings. Efficiency. There's most of your energy use. Renovate, at great expense, existing structures to incorporate passive solar design, put solar cells on roofs so long as these are available, and promote the use shades and ceiling fans that we have and are already doing as we have for half a century, despite the redundancy of promoting this. Just expire tax subsidies and exemptions for buildings that don't do this, phasing them out 10 percent a year and causing the wholesale razing and replacement as these 'substandard' structures are legislated out of existence.
3. There is no 3. steps 1 and 2 are certain to accomplish one of the goals of climate change alarmists - destruction or minimization of the industrialized world, and the commensurate punishment of those who enjoyed the standard of living made possible by profligate, in the opinion of these activists, consumption.
If Ara is to Google as Android is to Google, I'm with that.
It doesn't matter. Islam has been going this way for centuries.
That AC might not twang to quit their day job.
Yes, it was funny. Till it became real.
What would be a third role for a 1-2 seat Jet aircraft without a cargo bay? Oh, bomber, if you don't need much capacity.
I don't think of the A-6 as a fighter. Not does the F-104 seem to be much of a ground attack craft. It may not be difficult, but true air superiority fighters are nor automatically also serviceable ground attack craft, and some were never multi role
I'm not sure the F-117 is a fighter.
It means you need a hobby. Or your meds are low.
That is exactly how to fight a theater air superiority battle.
Bring in low-observable aircraft and elicit a missle launch.
ECM/maneuvers to survive, hopefully.
Loitering anti-radar aircraft target the missle site and hopefully the control site(s).
Ground probes monitor and report on communications traffic and identify transmitters.
More anti-radiation missles on the way.
Enemy loses its ability to command SAMs.
Ground assaults now only deal with handheld or small arms/AAA.
Profit.
;
Most likely the modern battlefield, be it air or ground, will see C&C denial the key to victory. Jamming, countermeasures, selective obfuscation, usurpation, spoofing.
The Islamofacists will not trust tech enough to be defeated by this. They will, however, learn to fight the cyber battle against their enemies. Us first-world combatants will keep trying to out-tech them, and end up using overwhelming force. And raising another generation of fascists with a more convenient excuse for murder than just hating everyone else.
The F-4 was multi-service. Navy variants may even have different refueling probes and avionics.
And its multirole functionality was largely due to avionics and weapons systems.
Look what they did with the F-15/16s, everything but carrier ops.
Ditto. And again.
If a ground-based LW radar can guide the AAM, Alli the fighter is doing is getting the middle close enough.
GBLW radar can use a lot of computer power to get the middle close enough to burn the stealth, or go IR.
Arrays will be steerable enough.
Keeping them small enough to fit on ships, that's fun.
Escape velocity of 1.5 ft/s is close to 1mph, I think.
That's a pretty delicate orbit.
"I agree that it's your device and you should be able to do anything with it,"
Has anyone considered reading the licensing and/or EULA? Claiming it's 'your device' is all well and good, but legally licensing decides this.
I'm not taking sides, just pointing out the legalities. YMMV.
If congressional staff is denied this recreational outlet, they will just find other mischief.
Which can only result in more laws and more spending
Really. My 5" phone behaves differently than my 7" tablet, and the UI adapts.
Unified UI from 4" phones to 24" all-in-ones? Why?
A unified kernel, that might be fun.
The sites that restart my autoplay preferences constantly. ESPN does this, and others.
Fat Lou did clean house.
A lot of those execs founded their own ventures, and a lot of them bought IBM stuff.
Of course, he also let go a lot of people who did nothing. I worked for a man at the time who had to deal with the do nothings, No love lost when they were gone.
FWIW...
I work for a S&P 500 financial corporation. I've been here through multiple major layoffs, one a 10% global layoff, the other a 20% global layoff. One in response to the unpleasantness in 2008-9, the other in response to business decisions to refocus and drive growth by investing in new markets and new products, necessitating divesting and letting a lot of good people go that simply did not do what was needed at the time.
It's a familiar and trite complaint that layoffs serve the C-level exclusively, but I can easily see Microsoft choosing to remove distractions, reduce current expenses, and even take the opportunity to shake the tree and rid itself of (real or imagined) low-hanging underperformers.
IBM did this repeatedly, and is still doing it, as large corporations regularly have to sift their work force and reset priorities, UNLESS they are consistently evaluating their strategies, have truly strategic planning that looks beyond the horizon, and work from a position of true knowledge of their business and performance. Microsoft is regularly accused of failed strategy and poor performance. And they can certainly be accused of being too big to be well managed, especially in the eyes of the minions who live with the decisions.
Microsoft's market(s) is(are) difficult places to predict performance. Intangibles rule in that space, and failure is the norm. Success if fleeting. Windows is Microsoft's bedrock, so as the marketplace starts to embrace nontraditional devices that need not use Windows, Microsoft should be looking beyond traditional and on to emerging opportunities. Can they move quickly enough to outflank competitors? Google is huge, but acts like a startup on specific projects. From my viewpoint, Kinect is the last Microsoft project that could be described as nimble. There are some interesting things they show off, but none yet ready for a product. Surface is just not floating anyone's boat yet. Nokia was dead on arrival, so losing that is admitting they could not resuscitate it with Windows Phone, the poster child for losing the traditional to the nontraditional. Ask me some time about my new set top box, running Microsoft Mediaroom, and closed captioning. At least Microsoft left this in marginally perfect state, but another idea they had to abandon.
Harrison's Postulate confirmed. Enjoy.
I raised $1800 for my first Turbo XT clone with a yard sale. Dual 5 1/4 floppies, 20MB HD, 8MHz CPU, 640K RAM, CGA baby!
It got updated to 3.5 HD floppies, 40MB drive, then out the door in 2 years and on to 286s, 386SX, blah blah blah. I paid a lot to be bleeding edge right up to Pentium 90s. After that I slowed down, and still run a Core 2 Duo at home that does Windows 8.1 very, very well.
My 3D Printer experiment will be a home made something, probably a GMax clone or similar beam frame kit. I need not pay all that retail, and I may buy a used Printrbot Simple which I see pretty regular. I can always resell it or scavenge parts.
GMax. I'm thinking of building a clone.
Actually my initial response was to an AC, not you.
No, notion that somehow I disagree that they're monopolies, and that somehow i rationalize against emergence of competition like charter schools. I not only do NOT, but I'm very much interested in alternatives to our failED public school system nationwide.
My comment about unions being corporations was informed by the reality that many unions are effectively subcontractors to trucking, contstruction, technology companies. Teachers unions fit this mold, though they and school systems would probably argue that.
Somehow you seem to think I'm not a lifelong conservative, steeped in capitalism, clinging to the hope that our Nation can somehow leverage our Constitution and sa be out nation from this president. Please reconsider your opinion of me.
What? You've confused me with some other person you've confused with a real person.
Here's a concept for yah...
Unions are actually corporations. They have a purpose.
That suffer the same problems as any corporations.
Deal with it.