Actually, the library can be if they know you have the intent to violate a copyright and assist you. So would CBS. The phrase you want to look up is "vicarious infringement".
Who owns the film? That is really the only question the needs to be answered. If CBS owns it, then there is nothing the fans or anyone else can do other than raise hell till someone listens.
Look, if I owned a classic Picaso painting, just because one of Picaso's theoretical descendants want it digitized would not give them to right to take the painting from me. Copyright only limits what the owner of the media can do when distributing or reproducing it, and it expiring does not suddenly put restrictions on the owners. In fact, all it does to CBS is remove restrictions on what they can do with the film.
I am allergic to grass pollen, should I sue all of my neighbors who do not use vacuum mulching mowers? Or should I close my own windows and take a modicum of responsibility for my own health?Obviously, the answer is to sue them. After all, I can not know ahead of time when I will need to leave because of an emergency at work, or to pick up groceries. So, they should be responsible for my health, after all it is an unfair burden on me to carry an asthma inhaler when they could use better technology.
Sarcasm off, now; seriously? If the guy can prove that he is sick because of those waves, what is he going to do? Sue everyone in 100 yard radius, and get them to disable their cell phones and wifi and microwaves, get the cell companies to create a dead zone over his house? If, and it is a big if, this is actually the problem for him, which is a 'more reasonable' solution: everyone around installs EM shielding; or he installs EM shielding.
Parent is right, take both. They both have features that will apply to future computer science topics that you will reach in your degree. Get a minor in math, if you can and have the time for it.
That said, if you really do not want to take both, then you need to think about which class will teach you more, and which one is applicable to what you want to do with your degree. Discrete math is programing: it is a great way to think in binary (truth tables), and if you have taken or will take a microprocessor course (assembly of some sort, and circuit design) then it is a good complement to the stuff you will learn there. Differentials and vectors show up in the real world, outside of computers. So if you plan on simulating anything, from AI to ray-tracing to path-finding, you need this information. What I am unsettled by, is the 'selected chapters' course. For me, vector math was an entire term. Only a credit or two for the course, but it built on Calculus 2 and ran parallel to multi-variable calc. Differentials was an entire course. Discrete math, though, covered just about everything that yours seems to, and is a pre-req for the more detailed graphs or proofs course. The reason I am unsettled, is that if those are the highest math courses you are required to take, you are getting ripped off. Take a proofs course, take first-order differential equations, take a full course on vectors geometry and graphs. If these two options are just second year courses to help you get interested, then take them both.
Not in all states. In Virginia, you can have a left turn block similar to what was posted above. Only with the straight green on the right, and the left arrows on the left.
If the driver thought they were in a left turn lane, and expected the left arrow to indicate it was safe to turn left; while they were in fact in a right turn lane and the light only meant they could go straight, then I could see a case for blaming both the snow covered light and unfamiliarity with the streets. Neither of those would be reason enough, because if you can't see the lights and you don't know the street than you shouldn't drive like you do; however, I am sure in that person's mind it is enough to remove a bit of their guilt about the situation.
That isn't a BBB statement. It is the BBB accredited icon, and their disclaimer. It does look fishy putting the two so close together, and the BBB may require them to have it.
What I find disturbing is that they have an A rating with the BBB, but there are three other businesses incorporated with the Video Professor name that do not. Only the one based in Denver, and the one that the website claims to be, have been rated at all. Any business folks want to chime in with how hard it would be for a business to just reincorporate in a different state / country every time the older corporation got into trouble? I assume that, if the founder kept the trademark then there would be no chance of the old company suing the new one, but what other hurdles might there be?
Think of what the point-and-shoot cameras will be doing in 15 years!
It is the same as film cameras. The cell phone is the disposable camera of the day. Low quality plastic lenses and, worse than with film, a horrible focal length. Point and shoot cameras are the same as before, some middle quality glass in a small, lightweight form. Some even have rather nice glass in them, good optical zoom, high pixel count. Then the DSLRs, bigger sensors and a larger focal length for a normal lens. For every person out there using a disposable film camera, there was a person who didn't quite like that quality and wanted something better. For their kid's soccer game, or birthday party, or just snapping pictures of their pets, didn't matter. Still won't. The cell phone might make a dent in that market, but until they add some features it won't make them obsolete.
MP3 players, well I am not far away from a computer during the work day, so 20 hours of battery life is over kill. Just enough battery time to get to my desk, and away from my desk is fine, so my phone works for me. Netbooks, I agree with you about, are a completely different market than cellphones. To some people, a netbook is just enough to check their email and favorite website, which a cellphone can do just fine. But to others they are much more powerful systems in a small package. Having seen Max/MSP on a netbook, I can understand the use for them. I would not want to write and test C or Haskell on a smartphone, but a netbook would be fine.
If this article had just said "Things that cellphones could replace for some people" or "Markets that cellphones will take a chunk out of" it would be completely different. But none of these are going away just because of cellphones.
I use my cellphone as a point-and-shoot, but I have a DSLR that takes good pictures. With a DSLR, I am not going to spend $100 on a cheap p&s when there is so much glass available. Other people I know, the non-photographers, keep a small p&s around with their cell phone. Why? 5x optical zoom, 12 megapixels (more than my DSLR *cry*), and something close to 10 mm focal length, as opposed to a cell phone with a 2mm focal length, no zoom, and 2 to 4 MP.
When cell phones start adding things like collapsible lenses to offer a slightly better focal length, multiple f-stop settings, higher megapixel ratings, and the providers stop gouging their non-savvy customers* to get the pictures off their phones; that is when cell phones will compete with even a simple point-and-shoot. Till then, cellphones are great for snapping quick pictures to send around (owls or cats making strange faces), but for even something like pictures at your kid's sporting event or birthday party, they just wont match a cheap point and shoot camera.
Move to Virginia. The SSI/SSDI/SSA here is, frankly, fairly simple. $X per month, based on living expenses. Then, for every dollar over $80 (or something close, it changed recently) you lose $0.50. Disability of any kind gets to keep medical coverage until they have not received an SSA/SSDI check for, I think 3 months. The only problems I have witnessed are when over-zealous HR folks tend to meddle. Some desk staffer answering a phone told a case worker that of course that person would be working full time by next month, the short hours were because it was only the end of the month. Never mind that the person hired was hired to work 100 hours over 3 months on a small grant project for the university, the HR clerk didn't know that and didn't need to ask. Three months of paperwork to straighten that one out. Oh, and the hour drives to the nearest county office, those are probably tiring too.
If what you mean is that $X per month is too low, then I would have to agree with you. I know someone who is getting less than $750 per month from disabilities, and something like 150 in foodstamps, so call it $900 overall. Their medical bills alone, just counting monthly prescriptions, are close to $500 which they don't pay right now because disabilities covers all medical costs within reason. That doesn't account for them getting sick, and needing extra doctor visits or new/different medication. They can not afford to get a full-time minimum wage job with no health insurance. Once the state medical coverage phases out when they work, they would get hit with more bills than they are making money. Doesn't stop them from trying, working short hour contract jobs for the university, and I guess short hours are good when you have $500 in pills to take every month. But it is discouraging to anyone trying to get on their feet to know they have to not just make it to sufficient in 3 months, but they have to be completely clear of the whole system in that time.
IP performance, as stated, is going to stink. Unlike solid-state memory over messenger pigeon, the transit time of tape over station wagon is going to be on the same order as the time needed to construct the packets. I am assuming a smart IP state machine, so reconstructing the station wagons will not be needed.
Using the same IBM 3400 series tape, 170MB each, with a transfer speed of 1,250,000 B/s each tape would take roughly 142.6 seconds to write. Not counting changing the tapes or moving them into the vehicles at hand, this results in a write time, per vehicle, of 260387.6 seconds. Or just over 3 days.
I suggest that, should this reach the RFC stage, some minor performance adjustments be considered. The physical connection seems strong enough, though progressive reuse of the same transit data structures may result in unforeseen bit rot. But I would suggest that the addition of a sub-system to perform just the data packet construction be mandatory. Stressing the CPU, and by proxy the user, with this overhead seems to be a waste when a dedicated facility could provide much better response time.
A hole in your LOX capillaries is far worse than a hole in your LH2. The LH2 will just vent, the LOX will probably light the aluminum skin of your missile on fire. LOX is very, very dangerous stuff.
I wasn't even considering what the skin of the device would be made of. You are right, aluminium would just oxidize in those conditions, and once it started the whole device is just gone.
Liquid rocket engines already pump their cryogenic fuel through similar capillaries in their exhaust nozzles for cooling. Those nozzles are coping with the heat given off by a rocket engine operating in the GIGAWATT power range, so a puny MW laser isn't going to stop them.
As for heating, that's not really a problem. The turbopumps are designed to cope with that. That's why rocket engines are complex and expensive.
Rocketry, not my field. I must beg ignorance to those details. I was thinking of just the hazards of venting either liquid to the atmosphere near a heated part of undetermined metal.
A megawatt laser does interesting things to the stuff if heats up. And when the laser hits the steam, which is composed of condensed water vapor, it revaporizes the droplets of condensed water in the steam so fast that you get a shockwave... All of a sudden, the missile isn't round anymore. *boom*
Hell, why try to burn through the side of the missile in the first place? Why not point it at the engine nozzles, which are going to be a bitch to make very reflective, and which often have lots of delicate-looking pipes and tubes just chock-full of juicy stuff. *boom*
I like the way you think, AC.
Hell, why even aim at the nozzles? To play a riff on that steam idea, all that nonreflective particulate matter in the exhaust stream might also do interesting things when lased. Just aim the laser at the brightest thing in the sky, induce shockwaves in the exhaust stream, and let 'em propagate up into the engine nozzles. *boom*
That pressure might be easier to deal with, that is so far outside my field that I couldn't guess reasonably. I would expect that the nozzles are able to withstand a good bit of that back-pressure, what with all the high velocity exhaust going past it, but I won't argue with an real or pretend expert. The shock wave could do more damage if it is off-axis a bit. The only problem is that, instead of being destroyed in flight, the rocket/missile/big-flying-thing is not controlled and as likely to land on something of yours as something belonging to the people who launched it. That assumes that it just shakes the nozzles and doesn't spin the device so far that shear forces rip it apart, of course.
So which sort of intelligence helps promote science or business, and which helps the individual: narrow or broad?
It isn't all that modern. At different times over the past 100 years, and back before that, the people considered intelligent have gone back and forth from very broadly trained people who may specialize in a given field and have a sudden insight on how to connect different fields, and narrowly trained individuals who excel in their field alone. Look at the topics that used to be taught in universities over history. And I am not just talking about the top 2%, the men and women whose names are in text books, but the other people working with or under them putting theory into action.
I would argue that in modern business, which fits with TFA, that being knowledgeable in one field is not enough. I am not going to knock Jim Bob over his knowing how to skin a deer with what ever is on hand. He will out-live me should society or all of civilization suffer a catastrophe. Even if hunting is the only thing he knows that well he will make a great hunting guide and will keep his family feed, but probably wouldn't be the one running that hunting tours company. Would you, as an uninformed party looking to break into this emergent tour industry, want Jim Bob, or his cousin Jake who may need a knife but also knows the basics of business and enough book keeping to budget himself? You don't have much capital, and can only hire one right away.
Hey, if this gets all our enemies to hide these mirror covered tanks, somewhere that the mirrors would not be visible to planes or ground troops or satellites; like lets just say an underground cavern or bunker where they can't shoot very well; I think we can declare success!
The laser itself needs several small laser-quality mirrors. The target would need a much larger quantity of the same mirrors, and in the same spectrum as the weapon. A plain bathroom mirror is not smooth enough to reflect that much without those imperfections absorbing a good bit of energy. If the laser really does use 'as much power as a household over an hour' then we are talking about 10kwh. 3.6E7 joules, over how ever large the surface area of the 'impact' point is, and you end up with a lot of heat in that 5 second burst.
Nope, that is definitely is going to take high quality mirrors to protect. For a moving target, say a rocket that is going to undergo high G acceleration, those mirrors will probably not survive launch. Other mobile targets, maybe. Buildings, well, putting meter tall neon letters on the roof saying 'this building is important' would be just as conspicuous. Mirrors, meet Predator. I think it has 500lbs of some iron that it would like you to meet.
I can see using the LOX as the pseudo cooling agent under the skin of the rocket, but the heat is going to cause it to expand, which is going to completely throw off the mix ratio in the combustion chamber. However, if a leak were to occur, the sudden vapor cloud from the escaping and expanding oxygen mixing with the now cold water vapor in the air might form enough of a local 'cloud' right in the laser's path to cause some extra disruption. But the rocket is still going to be without much thrust very shortly there after. And the cloud would only work if the laser isn't turned to go through water vapor clouds.
LH2, on the other hand, just seems like a bad thing to be heating. Make the laser take more time to get through the outer surface and hope you can out-speed or maneuver the tracking system. Otherwise, that first little hole will become catastrophic in a very short order. At minimum, that hold will be providing an unplanned thrust vector fed by the heat of the laser and the remaining O2 in the atmosphere. If you have both the LOX and LH2 at the same area, the rocket became scrap much quicker.
The gray line is much larger than 0.1% by an order of magnitude or more. Intersex conditions affect upward of 1% alone, and that is only physically manifesting conditions.
Just because, thus far, everyone has been shoe-horned into two genders does not mean it is beneficial to continue doing so.
The problem is, it's not all that rare. The rarity is in testing people, or telling them about what was discovered at birth. Research by Doctor Money (I kid you not, that was his name) made doctors think that the best thing for kids born with any apparent gender defect was to fix it and not even tell the parents if they could avoid it. And never, ever, tell the kid.
Are stories like this just this years 'shark attack' headlines, or is there a trend going on in the detection of these various genetic disorders? We've been hearing for years about hormones in the water supply, but premarin was one of the worst and has been on the decline for the last decade. And we hear about how those hormones in water might affect developed children. I figure someone is looking into the effect of long term exposure, in women who are hitting child bearing age now. That is going to be some scary data.
I admit I haven't played Eve, sounds like they hit pretty close to what I remember from p&p games. My only complaint, the one that kept me from trying the game, was that all skills were time based to develop. Someone with a year's head start and a 24hour bot (or did I hear they even allowed skill gains while offline now?) would always have better skills that a new player could never catch.
That, and if I am in a cockpit I expect more flight-sim type controls. Like X3 or hopefully Jumpgate. Personal preference for twitch-based combat for that style of gaming. Still sounds like they nail the details I was mentioning.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, the library can be if they know you have the intent to violate a copyright and assist you. So would CBS. The phrase you want to look up is "vicarious infringement".
Who owns the film? That is really the only question the needs to be answered. If CBS owns it, then there is nothing the fans or anyone else can do other than raise hell till someone listens.
Look, if I owned a classic Picaso painting, just because one of Picaso's theoretical descendants want it digitized would not give them to right to take the painting from me. Copyright only limits what the owner of the media can do when distributing or reproducing it, and it expiring does not suddenly put restrictions on the owners. In fact, all it does to CBS is remove restrictions on what they can do with the film.
There is only one good answer to this sort of thing. Paging Mrs. Roberts to the javascript department.
I am allergic to grass pollen, should I sue all of my neighbors who do not use vacuum mulching mowers? Or should I close my own windows and take a modicum of responsibility for my own health?Obviously, the answer is to sue them. After all, I can not know ahead of time when I will need to leave because of an emergency at work, or to pick up groceries. So, they should be responsible for my health, after all it is an unfair burden on me to carry an asthma inhaler when they could use better technology.
Sarcasm off, now; seriously? If the guy can prove that he is sick because of those waves, what is he going to do? Sue everyone in 100 yard radius, and get them to disable their cell phones and wifi and microwaves, get the cell companies to create a dead zone over his house? If, and it is a big if, this is actually the problem for him, which is a 'more reasonable' solution: everyone around installs EM shielding; or he installs EM shielding.
Parent is right, take both. They both have features that will apply to future computer science topics that you will reach in your degree. Get a minor in math, if you can and have the time for it.
That said, if you really do not want to take both, then you need to think about which class will teach you more, and which one is applicable to what you want to do with your degree. Discrete math is programing: it is a great way to think in binary (truth tables), and if you have taken or will take a microprocessor course (assembly of some sort, and circuit design) then it is a good complement to the stuff you will learn there. Differentials and vectors show up in the real world, outside of computers. So if you plan on simulating anything, from AI to ray-tracing to path-finding, you need this information. What I am unsettled by, is the 'selected chapters' course. For me, vector math was an entire term. Only a credit or two for the course, but it built on Calculus 2 and ran parallel to multi-variable calc. Differentials was an entire course. Discrete math, though, covered just about everything that yours seems to, and is a pre-req for the more detailed graphs or proofs course. The reason I am unsettled, is that if those are the highest math courses you are required to take, you are getting ripped off. Take a proofs course, take first-order differential equations, take a full course on vectors geometry and graphs. If these two options are just second year courses to help you get interested, then take them both.
Not in all states. In Virginia, you can have a left turn block similar to what was posted above. Only with the straight green on the right, and the left arrows on the left.
If the driver thought they were in a left turn lane, and expected the left arrow to indicate it was safe to turn left; while they were in fact in a right turn lane and the light only meant they could go straight, then I could see a case for blaming both the snow covered light and unfamiliarity with the streets. Neither of those would be reason enough, because if you can't see the lights and you don't know the street than you shouldn't drive like you do; however, I am sure in that person's mind it is enough to remove a bit of their guilt about the situation.
/. might be the biggest NSA front ever, as well. The NSA is soooo scary, we just never know where they might creep up.
Seriously, this is a valid reason now days?
And that is how they will collect the tax for health care. The fee will be a tax, with an equal tax credit for carrying private health insurance.
That isn't a BBB statement. It is the BBB accredited icon, and their disclaimer. It does look fishy putting the two so close together, and the BBB may require them to have it.
What I find disturbing is that they have an A rating with the BBB, but there are three other businesses incorporated with the Video Professor name that do not. Only the one based in Denver, and the one that the website claims to be, have been rated at all. Any business folks want to chime in with how hard it would be for a business to just reincorporate in a different state / country every time the older corporation got into trouble? I assume that, if the founder kept the trademark then there would be no chance of the old company suing the new one, but what other hurdles might there be?
Think of what the point-and-shoot cameras will be doing in 15 years!
It is the same as film cameras. The cell phone is the disposable camera of the day. Low quality plastic lenses and, worse than with film, a horrible focal length. Point and shoot cameras are the same as before, some middle quality glass in a small, lightweight form. Some even have rather nice glass in them, good optical zoom, high pixel count. Then the DSLRs, bigger sensors and a larger focal length for a normal lens. For every person out there using a disposable film camera, there was a person who didn't quite like that quality and wanted something better. For their kid's soccer game, or birthday party, or just snapping pictures of their pets, didn't matter. Still won't. The cell phone might make a dent in that market, but until they add some features it won't make them obsolete.
MP3 players, well I am not far away from a computer during the work day, so 20 hours of battery life is over kill. Just enough battery time to get to my desk, and away from my desk is fine, so my phone works for me. Netbooks, I agree with you about, are a completely different market than cellphones. To some people, a netbook is just enough to check their email and favorite website, which a cellphone can do just fine. But to others they are much more powerful systems in a small package. Having seen Max/MSP on a netbook, I can understand the use for them. I would not want to write and test C or Haskell on a smartphone, but a netbook would be fine.
If this article had just said "Things that cellphones could replace for some people" or "Markets that cellphones will take a chunk out of" it would be completely different. But none of these are going away just because of cellphones.
I use my cellphone as a point-and-shoot, but I have a DSLR that takes good pictures. With a DSLR, I am not going to spend $100 on a cheap p&s when there is so much glass available. Other people I know, the non-photographers, keep a small p&s around with their cell phone. Why? 5x optical zoom, 12 megapixels (more than my DSLR *cry*), and something close to 10 mm focal length, as opposed to a cell phone with a 2mm focal length, no zoom, and 2 to 4 MP.
When cell phones start adding things like collapsible lenses to offer a slightly better focal length, multiple f-stop settings, higher megapixel ratings, and the providers stop gouging their non-savvy customers* to get the pictures off their phones; that is when cell phones will compete with even a simple point-and-shoot. Till then, cellphones are great for snapping quick pictures to send around (owls or cats making strange faces), but for even something like pictures at your kid's sporting event or birthday party, they just wont match a cheap point and shoot camera.
*: Directed to Verizon.
We already function quite well with laws restricting people from knowingly lying about a person. How is that any different?
Move to Virginia. The SSI/SSDI/SSA here is, frankly, fairly simple. $X per month, based on living expenses. Then, for every dollar over $80 (or something close, it changed recently) you lose $0.50. Disability of any kind gets to keep medical coverage until they have not received an SSA/SSDI check for, I think 3 months. The only problems I have witnessed are when over-zealous HR folks tend to meddle. Some desk staffer answering a phone told a case worker that of course that person would be working full time by next month, the short hours were because it was only the end of the month. Never mind that the person hired was hired to work 100 hours over 3 months on a small grant project for the university, the HR clerk didn't know that and didn't need to ask. Three months of paperwork to straighten that one out. Oh, and the hour drives to the nearest county office, those are probably tiring too.
If what you mean is that $X per month is too low, then I would have to agree with you. I know someone who is getting less than $750 per month from disabilities, and something like 150 in foodstamps, so call it $900 overall. Their medical bills alone, just counting monthly prescriptions, are close to $500 which they don't pay right now because disabilities covers all medical costs within reason. That doesn't account for them getting sick, and needing extra doctor visits or new/different medication. They can not afford to get a full-time minimum wage job with no health insurance. Once the state medical coverage phases out when they work, they would get hit with more bills than they are making money. Doesn't stop them from trying, working short hour contract jobs for the university, and I guess short hours are good when you have $500 in pills to take every month. But it is discouraging to anyone trying to get on their feet to know they have to not just make it to sufficient in 3 months, but they have to be completely clear of the whole system in that time.
By asking nicely? And making you promise not to lie!
IP performance, as stated, is going to stink. Unlike solid-state memory over messenger pigeon, the transit time of tape over station wagon is going to be on the same order as the time needed to construct the packets. I am assuming a smart IP state machine, so reconstructing the station wagons will not be needed.
Using the same IBM 3400 series tape, 170MB each, with a transfer speed of 1,250,000 B/s each tape would take roughly 142.6 seconds to write. Not counting changing the tapes or moving them into the vehicles at hand, this results in a write time, per vehicle, of 260387.6 seconds. Or just over 3 days.
I suggest that, should this reach the RFC stage, some minor performance adjustments be considered. The physical connection seems strong enough, though progressive reuse of the same transit data structures may result in unforeseen bit rot. But I would suggest that the addition of a sub-system to perform just the data packet construction be mandatory. Stressing the CPU, and by proxy the user, with this overhead seems to be a waste when a dedicated facility could provide much better response time.
A hole in your LOX capillaries is far worse than a hole in your LH2. The LH2 will just vent, the LOX will probably light the aluminum skin of your missile on fire. LOX is very, very dangerous stuff.
I wasn't even considering what the skin of the device would be made of. You are right, aluminium would just oxidize in those conditions, and once it started the whole device is just gone.
Liquid rocket engines already pump their cryogenic fuel through similar capillaries in their exhaust nozzles for cooling. Those nozzles are coping with the heat given off by a rocket engine operating in the GIGAWATT power range, so a puny MW laser isn't going to stop them.
As for heating, that's not really a problem. The turbopumps are designed to cope with that. That's why rocket engines are complex and expensive.
Rocketry, not my field. I must beg ignorance to those details. I was thinking of just the hazards of venting either liquid to the atmosphere near a heated part of undetermined metal.
Disruption works both ways.
A megawatt laser does interesting things to the stuff if heats up. And when the laser hits the steam, which is composed of condensed water vapor, it revaporizes the droplets of condensed water in the steam so fast that you get a shockwave... All of a sudden, the missile isn't round anymore. *boom*
Hell, why try to burn through the side of the missile in the first place? Why not point it at the engine nozzles, which are going to be a bitch to make very reflective, and which often have lots of delicate-looking pipes and tubes just chock-full of juicy stuff. *boom*
I like the way you think, AC.
Hell, why even aim at the nozzles? To play a riff on that steam idea, all that nonreflective particulate matter in the exhaust stream might also do interesting things when lased. Just aim the laser at the brightest thing in the sky, induce shockwaves in the exhaust stream, and let 'em propagate up into the engine nozzles. *boom*
That pressure might be easier to deal with, that is so far outside my field that I couldn't guess reasonably. I would expect that the nozzles are able to withstand a good bit of that back-pressure, what with all the high velocity exhaust going past it, but I won't argue with an real or pretend expert. The shock wave could do more damage if it is off-axis a bit. The only problem is that, instead of being destroyed in flight, the rocket/missile/big-flying-thing is not controlled and as likely to land on something of yours as something belonging to the people who launched it. That assumes that it just shakes the nozzles and doesn't spin the device so far that shear forces rip it apart, of course.
So which sort of intelligence helps promote science or business, and which helps the individual: narrow or broad?
It isn't all that modern. At different times over the past 100 years, and back before that, the people considered intelligent have gone back and forth from very broadly trained people who may specialize in a given field and have a sudden insight on how to connect different fields, and narrowly trained individuals who excel in their field alone. Look at the topics that used to be taught in universities over history. And I am not just talking about the top 2%, the men and women whose names are in text books, but the other people working with or under them putting theory into action.
I would argue that in modern business, which fits with TFA, that being knowledgeable in one field is not enough. I am not going to knock Jim Bob over his knowing how to skin a deer with what ever is on hand. He will out-live me should society or all of civilization suffer a catastrophe. Even if hunting is the only thing he knows that well he will make a great hunting guide and will keep his family feed, but probably wouldn't be the one running that hunting tours company. Would you, as an uninformed party looking to break into this emergent tour industry, want Jim Bob, or his cousin Jake who may need a knife but also knows the basics of business and enough book keeping to budget himself? You don't have much capital, and can only hire one right away.
Hey, if this gets all our enemies to hide these mirror covered tanks, somewhere that the mirrors would not be visible to planes or ground troops or satellites; like lets just say an underground cavern or bunker where they can't shoot very well; I think we can declare success!
The laser itself needs several small laser-quality mirrors. The target would need a much larger quantity of the same mirrors, and in the same spectrum as the weapon. A plain bathroom mirror is not smooth enough to reflect that much without those imperfections absorbing a good bit of energy. If the laser really does use 'as much power as a household over an hour' then we are talking about 10kwh. 3.6E7 joules, over how ever large the surface area of the 'impact' point is, and you end up with a lot of heat in that 5 second burst.
Nope, that is definitely is going to take high quality mirrors to protect. For a moving target, say a rocket that is going to undergo high G acceleration, those mirrors will probably not survive launch. Other mobile targets, maybe. Buildings, well, putting meter tall neon letters on the roof saying 'this building is important' would be just as conspicuous. Mirrors, meet Predator. I think it has 500lbs of some iron that it would like you to meet.
I can see using the LOX as the pseudo cooling agent under the skin of the rocket, but the heat is going to cause it to expand, which is going to completely throw off the mix ratio in the combustion chamber. However, if a leak were to occur, the sudden vapor cloud from the escaping and expanding oxygen mixing with the now cold water vapor in the air might form enough of a local 'cloud' right in the laser's path to cause some extra disruption. But the rocket is still going to be without much thrust very shortly there after. And the cloud would only work if the laser isn't turned to go through water vapor clouds.
LH2, on the other hand, just seems like a bad thing to be heating. Make the laser take more time to get through the outer surface and hope you can out-speed or maneuver the tracking system. Otherwise, that first little hole will become catastrophic in a very short order. At minimum, that hold will be providing an unplanned thrust vector fed by the heat of the laser and the remaining O2 in the atmosphere. If you have both the LOX and LH2 at the same area, the rocket became scrap much quicker.
Of course they wouldn't be blinded in the conventional sense. The energy would just melt their eyes, same as it melts the target.
The gray line is much larger than 0.1% by an order of magnitude or more. Intersex conditions affect upward of 1% alone, and that is only physically manifesting conditions.
Just because, thus far, everyone has been shoe-horned into two genders does not mean it is beneficial to continue doing so.
The problem is, it's not all that rare. The rarity is in testing people, or telling them about what was discovered at birth. Research by Doctor Money (I kid you not, that was his name) made doctors think that the best thing for kids born with any apparent gender defect was to fix it and not even tell the parents if they could avoid it. And never, ever, tell the kid.
Are stories like this just this years 'shark attack' headlines, or is there a trend going on in the detection of these various genetic disorders? We've been hearing for years about hormones in the water supply, but premarin was one of the worst and has been on the decline for the last decade. And we hear about how those hormones in water might affect developed children. I figure someone is looking into the effect of long term exposure, in women who are hitting child bearing age now. That is going to be some scary data.
I admit I haven't played Eve, sounds like they hit pretty close to what I remember from p&p games. My only complaint, the one that kept me from trying the game, was that all skills were time based to develop. Someone with a year's head start and a 24hour bot (or did I hear they even allowed skill gains while offline now?) would always have better skills that a new player could never catch.
That, and if I am in a cockpit I expect more flight-sim type controls. Like X3 or hopefully Jumpgate. Personal preference for twitch-based combat for that style of gaming. Still sounds like they nail the details I was mentioning.