I wonder how well it would have handled the stress?
Not well. Certainly the passengers would not have enjoyed the sudden deceleration. As far as the plane, neither the flight controls nor the engines are designed to handle a supersonic airstream. At the very least you would probably get a compressor stall on all engines, which would not do anything good.
It's a pretty unlikely scenario though.... it's not like there's a sharp line with the wind on one side moving at 200 mph and zero movement on the other side.
You're literally arguing that the literal words in the contract don't mean what they literally mean. What the fuck? I mean, the contract didn't say "increased accuracy to better control lethality". It said literally "increased lethality". You think the contract misspoke?
Nah, I'm just not a selectively-quoting jackass, whereas you apparently are. What the text actually said is:
"increase lethality by enhancing the ability to detect, decide and engage before the enemy"
Better detection and improved decision making = fewer unintended casualties, and lower losses on our end. Ergo less killing.
So Truman dropped the second bomb adn the Japanese surrendered but one could argue the surrender was because of the pasting the Japanese Army was getting from the Soviets in Manchuria rather than the bomb.
One could argue all kinds of shit. The reason that the Russians were able to roll through Manchuria mostly unopposed is because the vast majority of the Japanese military was tied up fighting the Americans, with only a token force left on the mainland. The Japanese could have withdrawn from Manchuria entirely and focused on the defense of the home islands; it was pretty clear by that point that they were going to lose Manchuria whether or not they surrendered. The ability of Americans to wipe out entire cities ON the home islands from the air was of much more concern than whether or not the Russians took over Manchuria.
Kind of a dumb quote; for the incompetent, violence is usually the first or only refuge, not the last. Regardless.. what do you do when an incompetent resorts to his "last refuge" against you?
The testing was done well before the bombs were used in combat, so that's just a mind-bogglingly stupid statement. And given that civilian deaths due to the two bombs which ended the war are basically a rounding error compared to the civilian deaths caused by conventional bombardment, only an idiot would see them as somehow "ruining the reputation" of the US military.
The HoloLens military contract is specifically about (among other things) "increased lethality". Nothing about the contract is about improving achieving objectives without killing
Wrong; the objective is increased capability and accuracy which results in:
1. Fewer unintentended deaths. 2. Higher survivability of personnel equipped with that equipment.
The end result is a reduction in killing, not an increase.
That last sentence reads kinda like the start of a speech in the style of Grandpa Simpson's "onion on my belt". Wtf do you integrity and imaginary soul have to do with the subject at hand?
Cameras on seatbacks are irrelevant as you have no goddamn privacy on a flight to begin with. The hysteria is doubly amusing coming from people who carry around mobile computers with radios and multiple cameras built into them. This is a bit like freaking out when someone looks at you while you're in a park, despite the fact that you've built yourself a glass house.
It's a private forum by legal definition, yes, but by that reasoning so is the entire internet. Even net neutrality doesn't protect you; there are no laws barring your ISP from censoring your emails and messages since they are also a "private forum".
I'm honestly not worried in the slightest about someone having a video of me being bored and uncomfortable for 9 hours at a time. I guess if someone is really concerned about this they can always travel with a roll of electrical tape.
If "the vast majority of emotionally functional adults" truly accept it as a given that they do not have "the privilege" of speaking their mind in a public forum, then that is an incredibly sad commentary on the condition of our species.
All this handwringing about a website going, "Nah, spread that shit somewhere else" is ludicrous in the face of living in a society in which 99.99% of our existence is governed by decisions we don't get a say in.
This kind of reasoning is exactly why your life is governed by decisions in which you have no say.
"We already live in a society where 99.9897% of our life is governed by things in which we have no say, so taking away one more right from you won't hurt anything."
"We already live in a society where 99.9898% of our life is governed by things in which we have no say, so taking away one more right from you won't hurt anything."
That's just not even remotely true. Look at some of the TV shows from the past. Remember Leonard Nemoy's "In Search Of"? Complete horseshit from start to finish, yet millions of people swallowed it whole.
Most people have believed all kinds of stupid shit for as long as our species has been on this planet. Whether it's things like gods and demons, leprechauns and fairies, witches, ghosts, bigfoot, the loch ness monster, or little green men with anal probes, there has never been a shortage of people willing to believe crazy shit for no good reason. The idea that those folks are "1 in 1,000" is laughably naive. If they were only 500 out of 1,000, that would be a huge improvement.
To be fair, their statement does not say that the criticism itself is racist, only that he was subject to racist harrasement. Whether or not he actually was I don't know, but I wouldn't be surprised if he received a bunch of comments/emails from idiots calling him a "stupid n*gger" or some such.
It's still kinda ridiculous for them to throw out the race card, but what they were actually saying is being misrepresented here.
Department of United States Extra-Planetary Affairs
Sounds a hell of a lot less juvenile than "Space Force".
I guess the air force should have been called the Department of United States Above-Land Affairs?
Although if you're really going to propose something that silly for the space force, I would much rather go with Department of United States Extra-Terrestrial Affairs. Give all the UFO nuts something to go ape over.
There is *zero* net benefit from the modern human insulins over the older and vastly cheaper animal based insulins.
The advantages of human insulin over animal insulin is probably somewhat slight, and is further offset by some disadvantages. However human insulin isn't "modern"; it's been in use since the 1980s, grandpa! Modern insulin analogues absolutely do provide advantages over both animal and human insulin, as do modern delivery methods.
"A literature search spanning the last 25 years was carried out to identify publications addressing issues of insulin initiation, how insulin analogs can help overcome barriers to initiation, and the advantages of pen-type insulin delivery systems. Seventy-five publications were identified. These references illustrate that the drawbacks associated with regular exogenous human insulins (soluble and NPH) are improved with modern insulin analogs. The more rapid absorption of prandial insulin analogs compared with human insulin eliminates the need for an injection-meal-interval, increasing convenience, while basal analogs have no discernible peak in activity. Modern insulin delivery devices also have advantages over the traditional vial and syringe. "
No, I wasn't responding to that point since it didn't seem particularly interesting. You're purposefully misunderstanding what I was actually responding to.
It's greed that's driving the increases. Period.
Yep, just like when you ask for a raise. Pure fucking greed, you monster.
Why that greed has been so amplified in recent years is the real question. I think the current USA administration's attitude towards regulation and oversight has a great deal to do with it.
Hilarious. The guy I originally responded to had linked to an article which said:
"Drugmakers say they periodically need to raise U.S. list prices of their medications to help offset steep rebates they must offer to get them covered by insurance plans.
In the last two years, major pharmaceutical makers have limited annual price hikes of prescription medicines under growing pressure from the administration of U.S. President Donald Trump and Congress."
Shows how accurate your thoughts on the subject are, I guess. Totally makes sense that you would blame price increases between 2012 and 2016 on a guy who didn't get elected until 2016.
Slashdot Mirror
That sounds like an "in soviet Russia" joke.
I wonder how well it would have handled the stress?
Not well. Certainly the passengers would not have enjoyed the sudden deceleration. As far as the plane, neither the flight controls nor the engines are designed to handle a supersonic airstream. At the very least you would probably get a compressor stall on all engines, which would not do anything good.
It's a pretty unlikely scenario though .... it's not like there's a sharp line with the wind on one side moving at 200 mph and zero movement on the other side.
Yeah, that's what I was getting at, but I really like the way you've phrased it.
It sounds like you've watched too many westerns and want to turn every arrest into a quick-draw showdown ...
You're literally arguing that the literal words in the contract don't mean what they literally mean. What the fuck? I mean, the contract didn't say "increased accuracy to better control lethality". It said literally "increased lethality". You think the contract misspoke?
Nah, I'm just not a selectively-quoting jackass, whereas you apparently are. What the text actually said is:
"increase lethality by enhancing the ability to detect, decide and engage before the enemy"
Better detection and improved decision making = fewer unintended casualties, and lower losses on our end. Ergo less killing.
So Truman dropped the second bomb adn the Japanese surrendered but one could argue the surrender was because of the pasting the Japanese Army was getting from the Soviets in Manchuria rather than the bomb.
One could argue all kinds of shit. The reason that the Russians were able to roll through Manchuria mostly unopposed is because the vast majority of the Japanese military was tied up fighting the Americans, with only a token force left on the mainland. The Japanese could have withdrawn from Manchuria entirely and focused on the defense of the home islands; it was pretty clear by that point that they were going to lose Manchuria whether or not they surrendered. The ability of Americans to wipe out entire cities ON the home islands from the air was of much more concern than whether or not the Russians took over Manchuria.
Kind of a dumb quote; for the incompetent, violence is usually the first or only refuge, not the last. Regardless .. what do you do when an incompetent resorts to his "last refuge" against you?
The testing was done well before the bombs were used in combat, so that's just a mind-bogglingly stupid statement. And given that civilian deaths due to the two bombs which ended the war are basically a rounding error compared to the civilian deaths caused by conventional bombardment, only an idiot would see them as somehow "ruining the reputation" of the US military.
The HoloLens military contract is specifically about (among other things) "increased lethality". Nothing about the contract is about improving achieving objectives without killing
Wrong; the objective is increased capability and accuracy which results in:
1. Fewer unintentended deaths.
2. Higher survivability of personnel equipped with that equipment.
The end result is a reduction in killing, not an increase.
There is literally no difference between typing up orders in Word and using a Hololens in the field to direct drone strikes.
There's a big difference: the guy writing up orders in word has the potential to do a lot more damage than the guy directing the drone strike.
There was no CEO before her; she founded the company. What retard nodded this shit up?
That last sentence reads kinda like the start of a speech in the style of Grandpa Simpson's "onion on my belt". Wtf do you integrity and imaginary soul have to do with the subject at hand?
Cameras on seatbacks are irrelevant as you have no goddamn privacy on a flight to begin with. The hysteria is doubly amusing coming from people who carry around mobile computers with radios and multiple cameras built into them. This is a bit like freaking out when someone looks at you while you're in a park, despite the fact that you've built yourself a glass house.
Actually he's still white.
You would have to be an absolute fucking idiot to read Rei's post and conclude that she was happy about VWs problems.
It's a private forum by legal definition, yes, but by that reasoning so is the entire internet. Even net neutrality doesn't protect you; there are no laws barring your ISP from censoring your emails and messages since they are also a "private forum".
I think we need to revisit these laws.
Yep, like that Princess Diana chick. Never had to worry about a camera in her life.
I'm honestly not worried in the slightest about someone having a video of me being bored and uncomfortable for 9 hours at a time. I guess if someone is really concerned about this they can always travel with a roll of electrical tape.
If "the vast majority of emotionally functional adults" truly accept it as a given that they do not have "the privilege" of speaking their mind in a public forum, then that is an incredibly sad commentary on the condition of our species.
All this handwringing about a website going, "Nah, spread that shit somewhere else" is ludicrous in the face of living in a society in which 99.99% of our existence is governed by decisions we don't get a say in.
This kind of reasoning is exactly why your life is governed by decisions in which you have no say.
"We already live in a society where 99.9897% of our life is governed by things in which we have no say, so taking away one more right from you won't hurt anything."
"We already live in a society where 99.9898% of our life is governed by things in which we have no say, so taking away one more right from you won't hurt anything."
"We already live in a society where ...."
That's just not even remotely true. Look at some of the TV shows from the past. Remember Leonard Nemoy's "In Search Of"? Complete horseshit from start to finish, yet millions of people swallowed it whole.
Most people have believed all kinds of stupid shit for as long as our species has been on this planet. Whether it's things like gods and demons, leprechauns and fairies, witches, ghosts, bigfoot, the loch ness monster, or little green men with anal probes, there has never been a shortage of people willing to believe crazy shit for no good reason. The idea that those folks are "1 in 1,000" is laughably naive. If they were only 500 out of 1,000, that would be a huge improvement.
That single statement shows that you know as little about the scientists involves as you do about how the war was won.
To be fair, their statement does not say that the criticism itself is racist, only that he was subject to racist harrasement. Whether or not he actually was I don't know, but I wouldn't be surprised if he received a bunch of comments/emails from idiots calling him a "stupid n*gger" or some such.
It's still kinda ridiculous for them to throw out the race card, but what they were actually saying is being misrepresented here.
Department of United States Extra-Planetary Affairs
Sounds a hell of a lot less juvenile than "Space Force".
I guess the air force should have been called the Department of United States Above-Land Affairs?
Although if you're really going to propose something that silly for the space force, I would much rather go with Department of United States Extra-Terrestrial Affairs. Give all the UFO nuts something to go ape over.
There is *zero* net benefit from the modern human insulins over the older and vastly cheaper animal based insulins.
The advantages of human insulin over animal insulin is probably somewhat slight, and is further offset by some disadvantages. However human insulin isn't "modern"; it's been in use since the 1980s, grandpa! Modern insulin analogues absolutely do provide advantages over both animal and human insulin, as do modern delivery methods.
"A literature search spanning the last 25 years was carried out to identify publications addressing issues of insulin initiation, how insulin analogs can help overcome barriers to initiation, and the advantages of pen-type insulin delivery systems. Seventy-five publications were identified. These references illustrate that the drawbacks associated with regular exogenous human insulins (soluble and NPH) are improved with modern insulin analogs. The more rapid absorption of prandial insulin analogs compared with human insulin eliminates the need for an injection-meal-interval, increasing convenience, while basal analogs have no discernible peak in activity. Modern insulin delivery devices also have advantages over the traditional vial and syringe. "
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m...
You're purposefully misunderstanding
No, I wasn't responding to that point since it didn't seem particularly interesting. You're purposefully misunderstanding what I was actually responding to.
It's greed that's driving the increases. Period.
Yep, just like when you ask for a raise. Pure fucking greed, you monster.
Why that greed has been so amplified in recent years is the real question. I think the current USA administration's attitude towards regulation and oversight has a great deal to do with it.
Hilarious. The guy I originally responded to had linked to an article which said:
"Drugmakers say they periodically need to raise U.S. list prices of their medications to help offset steep rebates they must offer to get them covered by insurance plans.
In the last two years, major pharmaceutical makers have limited annual price hikes of prescription medicines under growing pressure from the administration of U.S. President Donald Trump and Congress."
Shows how accurate your thoughts on the subject are, I guess. Totally makes sense that you would blame price increases between 2012 and 2016 on a guy who didn't get elected until 2016.
I think we're done here.