Posts by Killing Time 478 publicly visible posts • joined 1 Apr 2011
'Rating music by the number of copies sold pretty quickly has you trying to defend Katy Perry or even Kiss.'
Actually I was pointing out that an act which has sold a truly significant amount of albums is just not going to be a support band to someone else. Additionally, as it happens, Appetite for Destruction didn't receive much acclaim or sales when first released.
If you are going to contribute you really should check you facts before exposing your prejudices.
I think the Space X achievements give him the kudos to take the piss out of potential competitors, it's just a shame his wit appears to have deserted him.
Bezos' ambitions are admirable but as yet the talk and vision are just not backed up by true innovation, a demonstrable track record or an aggressive launch and development program which might just achieve his stated aims.
The significant point I see in the exchange of letters is that despite there being no suggestion of anyone else's involvement in May's termination letter, in his response he goes out of his way to point out his trust for the civil servants and others in his dept.
Classic deflection. Muddying the waters by subtly inferring that the leak could have come from within the department. What a snakey POS. He doesn't give a toss who he screws over.
Dump him out of UK politics, period.
As I understand the letter, he was sacked due to his behaviour during the investigation.
This suggests at the very least that in private he was evasive despite his public undertaking and protestations. In a normal employment context this could be considered gross misconduct. Where are the facts to support the political finger pointing and scapegoating suggested?
A lack of cooperation is not something you can tolerate from a defence secretary on a security matter.
Good riddance.
I understand the figure of speech being used and find it acceptable if the context is meant honourably.
I have seen terms like 'Man up' and 'grow a set' on previous discussions on this subject. Didn't see anyone calling them out on those statements.
I wouldn't say it was juvenile either, quite the contrary as it's something more likely to be said by one of the less enlightened generations.
Misogynistic? Definitely, but then I'm a mysogonist...and so is my wife!
( Nod to The Life of Brian)
'And I was just about to break out my Duran Duran albums..'
Frankie's Two Tribes or Nena's 99 Red Balloons would be a bit more on the pulse of the politics at the time don't you think?
Duran Duran didn't exactly fire up the youth of the day with their incisive political insight.
They just about normalised the idea of eyeliner for boys!
'No the simplest is velocity as wave surfing over resonant electric field.'
Presumably you will be putting this theorem up for peer review and publishing? Or is it someone else's idea hence the AC posting.
Does it make some kind of prediction which is testable? If not, it is just so much conjecture and dismiss-able as presumably it is you doing in the later post regarding entanglement. I know there is a lot of time and effort being put into testing that, not so much into this theory to my knowledge.
"He has made a full and free confession"
House arrest is a long way from imprisoned, virtual or not.
Free as in not coerced, probably due to the fact that they didn't need to after that schoolboy error on the phone.
He has admitted being a naughty boy, here he has a chance to get out from under it with some dignity.
Well everybody lies so that's no biggie.
Let's see, imagine he was the source of wannacry, it did get out of hand and he panicked. Publicly claiming to have found the kill switch is an odd thing to do in a panic situation, activating it quietly and keeping your head down seems the more likely choice.
He has made a full and free confession (no doubt as he was bang to rights) he will no longer be wasting the courts system time, I suspect they will go pretty easy on him.
But we do know the facts -
Fact - He was released on bail by a UK court and chose of his own volition not to appear in court to answer the charges.
Fact - He chose of his own volition to reside in the Ecuadorean embassy for seven years and by his general behaviour alienate his hosts to the extent that they withdrew their offer of citizenship and asylum.
What isn't a fact or a reasonable assumption is that he wouldn't get a fair trial. If that was a reasonable assumption then every criminal brought before the court would have an infallible defence.
It's the courts role to decide which actions or beliefs are reasonable and which are not.
Assange understands that even if you don't, he jumped bail as he knows deep down that defence might work in the court of general opinion, those with little concept of the fundamentals of the justice system, those who are easily led and convinced of grand conspiracy or even those who were just to dumb to question why he felt he was so special, but it wouldn't work in front of educated, legally trained professionals.
Yeah but despite all the reams of personal opinion none of us is an arbiter of justice and that includes you.
Meanwhile, someone the nation actually employs to make that judgement says -
Assange's behaviour was "the behaviour of a narcissist who cannot get beyond his own selfish interest"
But never mind, I'm sure the public support of Pammy Anderson and Diane Abbott will make the judge question himself and reconsider his view.
Personally I'm a little peeved he wasn't thrown in the back of the Black Maria like most common criminals who resist arrest.
@hammarbtyp
Yeah but it's not all about deep ocean is it? You have to come into port and that is where depth and position is critical. I would posit there is a higher amount of traffic in coastal waters.
Your lorry driver analogy is pretty derisory of professional navigators in terms of ability and capability. Day sailors and Gin Palace drivers maybe and if they wish to ignore depth data then more fool them.
'if there was a choice between GPS inaccuracy and depth data, most navigators would believe their GPS over other data'
Really?? So they would ignore the data they couldn't verify by the mark one eyeball in favour of blindly following GPS data they potentially could roughly and quickly validate?
Done much marine navigation have you?
'The RD250 was once described as "expressly designed to power-wheelie learners[1] into roadside furniture"..)'
A mate of mine had to be the first in the area to own one when they were first released. He picked a brand new one from the dealer then dropped and wrote it off at the first roundabout he came to.
I'm not sure GPS would be the limiting factor regarding landing accuracy. Ships and planes managed to navigate pretty accurately without it.
I would have thought it was more the control / thruster technology along with the limited meteorology.
Upper atmosphere winds can now be measured, modelled in real time and fed back to the craft prior to entry
Doubtless the 60s and 70s capability was pretty crude to non existent by todays standards.
There is much to admire about Musk and his successes but equally there is a significant risk that these achievements and escalating personal wealth lead to overconfidence.
I suspect there are few people he would view as peers and if he sees himself as a disruptor, probably that view may extend to some aspects of business regulation. If this is the case he could feel justified in his comments.
Outside of your peers moderating your behaviour there is public opinion and there is the law.
With few peers and public opinion so fickle and shallow there is only application of the law likely to have any influence on him.
I doubt a monetary fine will make much difference to him however legal action and subsequent restrictions will put a serious crimp in his ability to reach his stated goals and ambitions.
Hopefully this will teach him to wind his neck in, grow up and understand that with great power comes great responsibility.
It was not being swayed by the public outcry, the extension of the five percent interest deal on the current account and the absolutely zero impact on my banking throughout the incident that retained my business.
That will remain the case until either I find a better deal or they have an issue that affects me.
Simples.....
Yes I had seen that Wiki entry but then sumised that NASA had probably also factored in data from their other, and possibly the European orbiting radar assets to get the best possible overview of the landing site soil layer.
I just didn't bother typing it ... Cheers again.
@Iglethal
It seems the landing site was selected using data from the MRO which has ground penetrating radar so you could expect NASA to have a good indication of soil granularity and depth. As you say, baring hitting a rock its not a complete shot in the dark.
Highly informative. cheers
'The shape is aerodynamic to ensure any passing wind presses the instrument towards the planet's surface so it won't topple over.'
I was under the impression the density of the atmosphere was so low that despite potentially high velocity it's force would be pretty negligible. I would have thought the winds cooling effect would have been a greater issue.
You could put a wider base on the instrument to keep the centre of gravity as low as possible but hey, what do I know, an aerodynamic dome shape works for all eventualities and they are the boffins after all...
'As someone in a similar role I can tell you that appointing someone this inexperienced is often a red flag for potential fraud.'
While I'm impressed with the level of comentards El Reg attracts these days I don't see that a lack of direct experience is necessarily a red flag. It does depend on the integrity of the personality.
It could equally be said that the greater the experience the more the likelihood of knowing the systemic weaknesses which lead to fraud.
Theoretically that is what oversight and audit are there to eliminate. If that is in place, risk of fraud shouldn't be unduly elevated.
'Especially if it landed somewhere deep in the ocean.'
Actually that could be the best possible scenario. A relatively soft landing which may protect its physical integrity and would result in it eventually ending up as far from a population as possible.
Surely a far better outcome than coming in to a high speed impact and smearing itself across a landmass. To me, that scenario doesn't bear thinking about...
You can plan the launch to try to ensure the downrange area is relatively clear however there is still the possibility that the launch failure may be such that it could only reach a rapidly decaying orbit and then the result would be like Russian roulette.
That's why they don't launch this material into space without exploring every other option.
'concerned about the dangers of a failed launch dumping a live nuclear reactor back on earth'
Yes, that is the principal concern in selecting the power source.
Opportunity was at the limit of the power to weight ratio where solar was feasible. The last rover, having more mass and greater scientific capability was only feasible using a nuclear power source.
By the way, an RTG is not a nuclear reactor in the sense I believe you are infering.
But you are right with your self declared attempt at wit.
What can mankind do to make an object such as the Moon worse? It has no atmosphere to screw up, it has no seas to poison, it has no ecology to unbalance and if you wait a few months, an incoming meteor will do more physical damage than mining and drilling would do over decades.
Let's think logically, not emotionally and not put barrier's in place where none are needed.
Conventionally, assessment of risk is
Likelihood X Potential Harm equals Risk
Potential Harm doesn't change only the likelihood can be changed in risk reduction.
Yes, the scenario you describe could result in the crane moving. But what is the likelihood of a miscreant being in the right place with the right gear and the motivation to do it? By most measures there are far more probable risks to spend time and effort resolving than this, such as someone breaking in and stealing a transmitter. I would argue that has a higher likelihood therefore you put your resources here rather than to an extremely low probability event. I would put your scenario at the same probability as a 'welded' control contactor or relay and they are at a level of acceptable risk.
At some point you have to set acceptable risk or you would never do anything.
Is this view based on direct knowledge or as it reads, just supposition?
I have direct knowledge of one current manufacturers approach, which in a nutshell, is highly proprietary protocol with a specific frequency / ID code combination individually configured between Transmitter and Receiver, low power so that effective range is no more than a few tens of meters ( close proximity line of sight) and default action is DO NOTHING unless a specific valid command is received in every decoded packet.
This appears to address your points, is already widely installed and has been for a couple of decades.
'Though you would hope that the controller itself would prevent some of the dangers as part of its functional safety management.'
They do, though you wouldn't know that if you just accept the so called report at face value. I do wonder what purpose 'reports' such as this hope to achieve other than FUD.
It would be interesting to know what the report author is offering by way of mitigation, what are they charging or how are they 'monetising' the results of their 'analysis'. To my knowledge they are not in the business of producing the equipment so are not pushing a particular product. Perhaps they are just somehow cashing in on the ignorance of people without the technical knowledge to make a rational risk assessment of this particular 'vulnerability' ( if I could reduce the font to sufficiently emphasise my assessment, you would barely make it out!).
By far, the biggest risk with equipment such as this is 'operator error' and it always will be.
Sadly, operator assessment and training funds may be disproportionately redirected to resolve this non issue. The cynic in me thinks the motivation is just the search for the next Millennium Bug and the business opportunities it created.
'Suppose it turns out to be really not much of a big deal after all. Except for re EU which declines into insignificance and te profits of a few European (not British) companies that take a nosedive?'
While your positive metal attitude would be commendable in a lot of situations, really, this is not one of them. In fact, it appears borderline delusional where you think that the loss of an economy and population of 66 Million from a far larger economy currently driven by a population of 742 Million would result in their demise and commercial decline.
I don't doubt you are educated, youthful,non racist and believe you have made a rational assessment. I just think you are naive.
I don't suppose my point above would make any difference to your positive and sunny outlook because you have rationalised our exit as resulting in the EU's demise.
If it were a game of poker I would love to be playing with you because you are on full tilt, sadly its not and I don't want to be part of your 'all in' strategy. When I go all in there are multiple outs, in this case, the probability is low to non existent on hitting the miracle card you are hoping for.
@Jtom
Yes,in line with the subject matter a lot of the comments on this thread are purile. What that has to do with our politics I have no idea.
It doesn't take a European to point that out. West or East.
You need a far better command of the language to avoid your trolling attempt being so obvious.
I'm willing to bet you probably had 'must do better' on your school report.
'The Diddy Men all had convincing sounding names such as: Dicky Mint, Sid Short and Hamish McDiddy, and they danced around and sang in chipmunk style voices. But it eventually came to light that it was all a clever conspiracy perpetrated on the nation's school kids and that the "Diddy Men" were actually just children dressed up.'
I am gobsmacked! You have just confirmed my long held suspicion.
So they weren't real after all!
I remember them so clearly and was totally taken in by their names, dancing, singing and dressing up. Tell me, when did it 'eventually come to light' for you?
As a six year old it was about twenty seconds after seeing them my suspicions were aroused, how about you?
"When you run out of arguments, you make a fool of your opponent."
Who is the 'opponent' here? The article is just highlighting the volte face of a broadcaster you might reasonably expect to check it's fact prior to transmission.
A little touchy aren't we?
The author claims to have been a previous Assange critic, however I don't see the article revealing any new info which may have swayed her claimed previously held opinion. Or anything which adds to the public debate for that matter.
Its just a rehash of all that has gone before including the fallacies being perpetuated surrounding the legal position of the Swedish charges, and the bizarre expectation that the Swedish authorities should have come to London to interview their suspect.
It strikes me as an opinion piece just to fill column inches. Neither here no there.
That's the thing about opinions, they can change like the wind for some people but unfailingly they are like arseholes, everyone has got one....
@menasco
There is a mechanism in written English where you start a new paragraph when you are making a new point. It helps the reader understand where you are going with your argument.
You may want to try it sometime, though having trudged through your post, personally I don't think it would have helped.
Errr... Its an aspiration...It's a straight right at the ERG...
She was handed a busted flush, compounded it by gambling on a snap election to gain a mandate and ended up hamstrung by the vagaries of the Great British electorate....
There really are far worse political players in the frame who could balls it up even more. Give her a break!
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2025
