So, you're saying that 500 small motorboats, each armed with a stinger missile and/or torpedo, all attacking simultaneously, could not make a single significant hit on an aircraft carrier, one (or more) possibly capable of sinking it. Curious. In that scenario, would you choose to be on that carrier?
Submersible drone launch platforms with a mix of flying and torpedo drones. The ship, itself a drone, will most likely travel just deep enough to avoid detection. Sonar stealth tech will help with that to some degree.
None of our aircraft carriers would survive a simultaneous attack of 500+ small watercraft, each armed with a missile capable of creating a hull puncture sufficient to sink the vessel (or a mix of missiles and torpedoes). This is what Iran, or any small power will do if attacked by an aircraft carrier. The first casualty of such a conflict will be the perception of American power.
So, we're massing several of these dinos in the gulf, hoping that they might protect each other. I expect that we will lose at least one, should a conflict occur. Possibly more.
I've used Windows 8. It's not that great. Nobody will pay extra for it despite what the consultants told you. Your "surface" will be a loss leader designed to gain market share or it will simply fail. Thank you for your attention.
So, speaking of assumptions unfounded in reality, you're saying that China has no shipwrights? And that they have no engineers who can study the plans and layout of existing ships, particularly hull design and friction, and improve on them? In case you haven't noticed or anything, the Chinese are pretty talented at studying and manufacturing things. I'm having a hard time thinking this is something they couldn't handle.
So, since my assumptions are so unfounded, I'm sure you can provide adequate justifications, with numbers and references. Have at it!
The Chinese government does this a lot, even though it makes little sense. There have been many advances since the first stealth fighters were designed. Had they started from scratch, they would have had a better product. Same with aircraft carriers. They bought one from that technological power house, Ukraine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_aircraft_carrier_Varyag). So many advances in ship design have come and gone between the construction of that ship and now, that it makes little overt sense to try and retrofit it. China has thousands of unemployed engineers who could have done a much better job starting from scratch.
And don't get me started on the WTF(!) of the three gorges dam. Hundreds of small dams along the length of the Yangtze would have been manageable, affordable, allowed precise flood control, generated just as much power and provided significant redundancy. One big dam is just a single point of failure and is asking for trouble.
For a country largely governed by engineers, I would have expected better decisions.
Actually, almost anyone, without a code sample is fucked. Nobody learns coding these days without looking at, and/or re-purposing code found on the web (which of course, never does exactly what you want, but gets you started). There are worked problem in math books. There are coding samples in programming books. The trick, in either case, is to actually learn from the sample. Getting time and space to do that is the hard part.
Not that I'm in a position to criticize. Self-taught. Ignorant of many useful data structures and algorithms. I squeak by on clarity, organization, simplicity and extreme usability, but I could stand a lot more basic CS (and the time to study it).
Coal, natural gas and oil are declining, both in quantity and net energy return. Uranium, thorium - not so much. Want a large scale industrial civilization where 7 out of 8 people *aren't* starving by 2100? That means power and lots of it. There's some energy in sun, wind and water. Not enough to support the hydrocarbon population bloat we've created. Mass death or nuclear are pretty much your only choices if you don't get population control and/or massive conservation efforts. Since these won't sell to the public, nuclear is what we get.
Actually, there was quite a lot of this going on in the late 90s. I just never tracked what became of it. Alas, it's not a problem for me (i.e. salaried and working for a corporation).
Scenario: I incorporate in the Caymans or Hong Kong or somewhere where ownership information doesn't have to be disclosed to the USA. My bank account and web site are there too. The corporation "hires" me, but otherwise keeps any profit. I pay income tax on my declared income, but have access to the corporation's funds via credit card.
Liabilities? Problems? Legalities? Inquiring minds want to know!
It's stupidity I'm not fond of. Religion is a broad topic. It would be more accurate to say that I dislike theology, gurus like Jesus, Mohammed, et. al. or their fan clubs.
You're quite welcome. Ad hominem attacks are of course, appropriate when the original statement makes no appeal to reason, logic or facts. Moreover, those quoting religious figures as justification for anything are unlikely to be swayed by any sort of rationality. The best you can do is make them look ridiculous by pointing out the most absurd features of their arguments. Fortunately, this is rarely difficult.
Slashdot Mirror
I'd rather have several hundred submersible drone platforms, with the sub itself being a drone.
So, you're saying that 500 small motorboats, each armed with a stinger missile and/or torpedo, all attacking simultaneously, could not make a single significant hit on an aircraft carrier, one (or more) possibly capable of sinking it. Curious. In that scenario, would you choose to be on that carrier?
Submersible drone launch platforms with a mix of flying and torpedo drones. The ship, itself a drone, will most likely travel just deep enough to avoid detection. Sonar stealth tech will help with that to some degree.
None of our aircraft carriers would survive a simultaneous attack of 500+ small watercraft, each armed with a missile capable of creating a hull puncture sufficient to sink the vessel (or a mix of missiles and torpedoes). This is what Iran, or any small power will do if attacked by an aircraft carrier. The first casualty of such a conflict will be the perception of American power.
So, we're massing several of these dinos in the gulf, hoping that they might protect each other. I expect that we will lose at least one, should a conflict occur. Possibly more.
I've used Windows 8. It's not that great. Nobody will pay extra for it despite what the consultants told you. Your "surface" will be a loss leader designed to gain market share or it will simply fail. Thank you for your attention.
Cheers!
Mr. ColdWaterOfRealityMan
So if Romney is elected, we get to see all his tax returns?
So, speaking of assumptions unfounded in reality, you're saying that China has no shipwrights? And that they have no engineers who can study the plans and layout of existing ships, particularly hull design and friction, and improve on them? In case you haven't noticed or anything, the Chinese are pretty talented at studying and manufacturing things. I'm having a hard time thinking this is something they couldn't handle.
So, since my assumptions are so unfounded, I'm sure you can provide adequate justifications, with numbers and references. Have at it!
Well, except for San Bernardino.
The Chinese government does this a lot, even though it makes little sense. There have been many advances since the first stealth fighters were designed. Had they started from scratch, they would have had a better product. Same with aircraft carriers. They bought one from that technological power house, Ukraine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_aircraft_carrier_Varyag). So many advances in ship design have come and gone between the construction of that ship and now, that it makes little overt sense to try and retrofit it. China has thousands of unemployed engineers who could have done a much better job starting from scratch.
And don't get me started on the WTF(!) of the three gorges dam. Hundreds of small dams along the length of the Yangtze would have been manageable, affordable, allowed precise flood control, generated just as much power and provided significant redundancy. One big dam is just a single point of failure and is asking for trouble.
For a country largely governed by engineers, I would have expected better decisions.
Actually, almost anyone, without a code sample is fucked. Nobody learns coding these days without looking at, and/or re-purposing code found on the web (which of course, never does exactly what you want, but gets you started). There are worked problem in math books. There are coding samples in programming books. The trick, in either case, is to actually learn from the sample. Getting time and space to do that is the hard part.
Not that I'm in a position to criticize. Self-taught. Ignorant of many useful data structures and algorithms. I squeak by on clarity, organization, simplicity and extreme usability, but I could stand a lot more basic CS (and the time to study it).
Coal, natural gas and oil are declining, both in quantity and net energy return. Uranium, thorium - not so much. Want a large scale industrial civilization where 7 out of 8 people *aren't* starving by 2100? That means power and lots of it. There's some energy in sun, wind and water. Not enough to support the hydrocarbon population bloat we've created. Mass death or nuclear are pretty much your only choices if you don't get population control and/or massive conservation efforts. Since these won't sell to the public, nuclear is what we get.
It provides the illusion of legitimate democracy while actually effecting nothing, thus keeping the herd *quiet*
It would be better with free popcorn. Of course, you'd never get it on the plane.
Actually, there was quite a lot of this going on in the late 90s. I just never tracked what became of it. Alas, it's not a problem for me (i.e. salaried and working for a corporation).
Scenario: I incorporate in the Caymans or Hong Kong or somewhere where ownership information doesn't have to be disclosed to the USA. My bank account and web site are there too. The corporation "hires" me, but otherwise keeps any profit. I pay income tax on my declared income, but have access to the corporation's funds via credit card.
Liabilities? Problems? Legalities? Inquiring minds want to know!
After breakfast, certainly.
Is there nothing you can't do...?
And those 1 D beaks? The chicks just don't dig them.
Apples and oranges. A dubious quote attributed to Jesus != the caste system as an established fact.
As do I, but I don't dislike meditation itself, which is simply a useful form of neurohacking.
It's stupidity I'm not fond of. Religion is a broad topic. It would be more accurate to say that I dislike theology, gurus like Jesus, Mohammed, et. al. or their fan clubs.
You're quite welcome. Ad hominem attacks are of course, appropriate when the original statement makes no appeal to reason, logic or facts. Moreover, those quoting religious figures as justification for anything are unlikely to be swayed by any sort of rationality. The best you can do is make them look ridiculous by pointing out the most absurd features of their arguments. Fortunately, this is rarely difficult.
The typical politician's response.
Given the Fed's recent tendencies, I'm for shooting bundles of it into space.