Re: Control Groups
"What did the groups of mice exposed to red and green LEDs do?"
Mostly sang Christmas carols.
1233 posts • joined 23 Dec 2009
As someone who has built both PC and Pi versions of arcade cabinets, I do understand what you mean. HOWEVER, I don't think that is really the case for most games any longer. What I have running on my current Pi 3 build works flawlessly. And I don't have to rebuild it every other month like my original DOS PC or annually like the later Windows PC edition. My Pi 3 build has been rock solid from day one to day now. Yes, there are some games that don't work well and a few not at all but, considering how old a ROM set I'm working with, I'm actually pleasantly surprised at how few that turns out to be.
oh, wait. I now see what may be the point of confusion. You wrote "any flying thing of 25kg+ isn't...". Did you perhaps mean to say "any flying thing of 0.25kg..."? If so, then I withdraw my further remarks because I agree with you. Feel free to mutter something about we former colonists and our antiquated measurement standards... ;-)
understood. This is why I noted that most hobbyist RC aircraft and specifically the ones about which I am speaking fall between 250g and 25kg. I could argue that many of the <250g aircraft are not toys either but that would divert from the primary point so I'll leave it alone and continue focus on those between 250g and 25kg. I think the confusion was an earlier respondent wrote "25kg" when perhaps meaning to write "0.25kg". The reason this was confusing for me is because any craft over 50 pounds (22.7kg) are already subject to further regulation and I have no issue with that.
No, I didn't miss that - I was merely trying to keep my post from becoming too long. Neither did I miss that <250g craft are (for now, at least) exempted. About half of my RC aircraft are under 250g and, if this goes forward, that percentage will increase to at or near 100%.
Most hobbyist RC aircraft fall between 250g and 25kg. They are neither children's toys nor used for professional purposes. These are the aircraft which I believe should, for the most part, be exempted from the proposed FAA rules under discussion or at the very least differentiated from professional gear. The Part 107 rules were intended for professional gear but then the agency decided to paint with too broad a brush.
...is that it lumps all remotely piloted vehicles (RPV) together under the generic term "drone" which is decidedly ambiguous. There are enormous differences in size/usage/modes of flying between, for example, a professional multirotor used for aerial inspection/photography and a consumer-grade DJI quadcopter and a 2m wingspan scale model of a DeHavilland Mosquito and a 50cm wingspan child's toy Cessna 172. The ONLY thing those examples have in common is a pilot on the ground rather than onboard the aircraft. The consumer quadcopter and child's toy are generally more accessible to a casual user and more likely to be used in an unsafe or cavalier manner. The scale Mossie significantly less so, if for no other reason than cost. The DJI and professional multirotor can be flown virtually anywhere, including BVR (beyond visual range), whereas the Mossie and (to lesser extent) the child's toy Cessna require significantly more open space and are nearly always flown within Line Of Sight. These distinctions are important because:
1) None of the reported safety/security incidents I'm aware of involving remotely piloted vehicles were fixed wing hobbyist airplanes - they were all camera-equipped multirotors flying in a manner that is already prohibited (near airports/other controlled airspace).
2) there have been zero downed "traditional" aircraft or on-the-ground fatalities in any reported incidents - even though those persons were flying unsafely and/or outside existing regulations.
I have no problem with putting the proposed regulations on the professional multirotors because those, by design and intended use, will be employed in more potentially sensitive locations for legitimate purposes (inspecting crops or industrial equipment, filmmaking, news reporting, etc). The hobbyist quadcopters COULD be lumped in with the professional ones but probably shouldn't be. The hobbyist fixed wing aircraft, by nature of their different mode of operation and "theater of operation" should be exempted. And yes, there are idiots who disregard the rules and common sense and fly in unsafe/illegal manner - and those persons should be caught and punished accordingly. However, the FAA proposal as currently written clearly "throws the baby out with the bathwater".
Not only are the directors of a company are legally obliged to put the interests of the shareholders first, as stated by MJB7, but also consider that the employees make up a significant chunk of shareholders through their company retirement system, commonly known as a 401k savings plan. And I'm not just talking about middle and upper managers who may get stock options as bonus - I'm also talking about developers and wrench turners and paper pushers and everyone else in the employee chain as well.
Yes, it would be MUCH preferred for them to say "what's in the best interests of our employees and our company" and genuinely mean it. However, anyone who has been there for more than a few years and participates in the 401k plan isn't COMPLETELY screwed. Mostly, but not completely. I have first-hand knowledge of a similar situation.
"Let me get this straight. You have to register with a party to get a vote, fair enough. Then you have to turn up in a wee room to cast a vote. Then if your chosen candidate doesn't make the top two in that wee room then you have to vote for someone else. Then the room vote is eventually phoned in to the state tally, and the number of delegates depends on those totals That is so 17th century."
Bear in mind, that is just the admittedly bizarre and arcane Iowa Caucus - the first in a LONG series of events in the complex presidential election process. And yes, it IS "so 17th Century." Most of the rest of the country, during this part of the process, uses "normal" election procedure.
It should also be pointed out that registration to vote is a requirement in all states so far as I know but, in some states, that can be done on election day at the voting precinct. And registering with a particular party is not always required either. Some states do require that but others do not. In addition to Republican and Democrat, at least in my home state of Louisiana and many others, one can register as Independent, No Party (not technically the same as Independent for some reason), Libertarian, or one of the "lower rung" parties like the Green, Socialist, Constitution, etc. I say "lower rung" because they typically represent single digit percentages of voters and have no significant impact on election outcomes at the national level.
"Such ambition highlights one of the difficulties with ERP projects: a single version of the truth rarely survives complex business change, especially during mergers."
Having just completed a massive SAP upgrade, which included rolling in a merger slightly pre-dating the upgrade, I can only sadly nod my head and mumble something about truer words having never been spoken... Especially this bit: "£6.7m, primarily comprised of 'consultancy and incremental additional staff costs to support the project' " Now if you will excuse me, I must make an appointment with my optometrist. The last statement caused my eyes to roll beyond advisable limits and I fear something has become misaligned.
This post has been deleted by a moderator
MS tried that with the early designs for XBox One. They also tried "always on" both for box and internet connectivity as the only option. They backed off both ideas after much outcry from the user community. You CAN run discless and/or "always on" if desired, but you don't HAVE to.
Any brewery that has the chutzpah and customer focus to make their recipes publicly available for home brewers is doing it right and deserves to be supported. I only wish their products were available to buy in MY little corner of Yankville...
"It has been seven years since the problem of robocalls became so significant in America that the Federal Trade Commission offered a $50,000 cash prize to anyone that could come up with a way to block them. At the time the director of the FTC's Bureau of Consumer Protection said that “the winner of our challenge will become a national hero,” highlighting just how infuriating it had become. The prize was eventually split between two companies."
Nomorobo is one of the two companies which split the prize. Their service works pretty well. At least in the US, it's free for landlines/VOIP and somewhat reasonably priced for cell service (although, as mentioned in the article, it SHOULD be freely provided by the telcos). With Nomorobo, my robocalls dropped from >20/day down to <5/day. The only thing that service doesn't do that my cell phone does is block specific numbers - and my cell phone does that directly in the device rather than because of anything the telco/provider does. Some of my robocallers don't bother to spoof or change their numbers often so number blocking works against them for a time.
"luckily there's not much up there in the Moon, it's a real wasteland, so they would not be dangerous
(ha! they could maybe throw rocks ;-) nothing else's up there)"
Well, there's always that former secret Nazi base, presumably mit über-weapons awaiting der launchen coden
per this Reddit thread was to downgrade to older firmware.
"The only surefire ways to avoid this is to either downgrade switches and AP to a pre-4.0.60 version. 4.0.51 is stable for me. Some of the later .5x versions were a bit broken. Or block all WAN traffic to/from AP's and switches (which is best practice anyway). They don't need any external access, just the gateway and controller."
However, be advised that later in the thread someone stated that blocking WAN traffic to/from APs was problematic.
"The kicker being that if you did isolate them so that they could not phone home there was a memory leak bug that released with this “feature” that meant they would become unusable very quickly due to repeat retries."
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2020