Re: 1st
Yeah, you win. Dammit.
497 publicly visible posts • joined 28 Oct 2011
The AF pilots land gently and us up every bit of runway.
The "using all the runway" really applies when doing medical retrievals. Certain problems (intracranial generally) mean that sudden accelerations/decelerations are bad for the patient, so a long run out can be requested from the pilot.
When landing in a light aircraft at a commercial airport, that is a llloooooonnnnnnngggggg runway. I never actually timed it but it felt over 30 seconds from touching to turning off the runway.
The US (and in this case South Africa) are not renowned for supporting democracy when it gives the "wrong" (ie not right) result.
Doesn't mean that the Cubans were well behaved or we should consider them as morally superior in this situation. Like I said, even messier than the usual cold war mess.
"Soviet Union puppet state"? Really?
It's more of a muddle that the usual cold war mess, given the Russians weren't interested, the US were but were hiding behind apartheid South Africa, the Cubans were supporting democracy and the problem arose when the Portuguese withdrew from their empire (yes, this was the late 1970s, not the 1500s!).
It would have been better to have allowed democracy but the risk of a left wing (to the US) black (to S Africa) government was anathema. I don't think anyone emerges with glory.
the public will just picture some turban-wearing, faceless guys in a cave full of AK-47s and suicide vests getting shot by a heroic square-jawed group of Gi-Joe style Marines
You missed the adjectives "brown" and "white" out of the above sentence. I'll let you work out where they go.
I think it's inappropriate from the hospital's point of view. They want their staff to be professional and to have impeccably boring professional lives. Given that the pics are clearly taken inside the hospital, I think they have some say in the matter.
Doesn't mean that said administrators are not humourless gits though. And it demonstrates how work infiltrates into life more generally: what are the boundaries beyond which work should butt out? Particularly pertinent for me currently as I am on call... this opinion may, therefore, be construed as one my employer holds (it isn't, AFAIK).
And finally, has nobody here seen a naked middle aged man before?
I am sceptical that a folding wing (or more precisely, an unfolding wing) is a good thing to rely upon when landing a great height.* I would be worried about the likelihood of getting man-rated. Complexity = problems, AFAIK. OTOH, SpaceX seem to have managed the complexity of reversing rockets to land vertically so maybe they'll manage the unfolding wing which doesn't break or remain folded.
* space.
Good link, and well argued points. Have an upvote. But old references. I think subsequent empirical data suggests that the protective affect is overstated.
And I think the statistician has taken the population mean and assumed that it relates to him... which is a rather embarrassing error for such a detailed rebuttal! Same for the linear assumption - that describes a population not an individual (although in that case I agree it's more likely to be a sigmoidal curve - I suspect a linear one has been used as we can't be sure where the inflection points are and putting them in would cause more problems that it would solve).
Dame Sally is right. The claimed protective effects of alcohol have been vastly overstated, and may be non existent. The risk of harm with alcohol starts with any consumption and increases.
The level of harm remains small for the vast majority of the population. (There are a few who will develop cirrhosis at tiny - like under 1 pint/day for 5 years - doses of alcohol, but even in the very highest consuming groups - 2 bottles spirits/day for decades - not everyone develops cirrhosis. They never look particularly healthy, mind.) Any level of intake will increase risk factors for vascular disease like BP, dyslipidaemia, inflammation (if you are foolish enough to believe cardiologists about inflammation being bad), and risk of malignancy. It also contains a fair number of calories - hence beer bellies.
Having said all that, drinking is enjoyable; it's your life; these are only guidelines and apply to the population not individuals. If you don't want to follow guidelines you don't need to; being angry about it isn't helpful. And the suggestions that this is to "increase taxes" seems proper nutter internet conspiracy theory.
my choice of alcohol -->
(to cope with all the downvotes:-)
They're two entirely different vehicles, and SpaceX has undoubtedly benefited from the lessons learned by their predecessors.
ie don't let other agencies strong arm your design team into adding their bits, like the air force demanding cross landing capabilities with the shuttle (so it could land after less than one orbit without anyone knowing where it had been) which completely ruined the proposed lift capcity.
SpaceX also benefits from not having to worry about people riding on their rockets... They want to launch people one day
But this advantage isn't that big, as they want their man rating eventually and won't plan to redesign the whole thing in order to make sure it gets it; man rating was built in from the beginning (IIRC).
Enough complaints from me; a beer to Musk for all his efforts and all those who do exciting things in space.
I think that's really what this meeting is about. The intelligence community is coming to the tech companies and saying sorry (not publicly, that would be too much) and asking for their help, "cos we can't fight terrorism without you."
At least, I hope that this is the beginning of the big realisation dawning. But the intelligence community is not (so far) making it easier on themselves...
Icon: well obviously
The lower stratum is concerned with the portion immediately above the land and interference with this air space would effect the landowner’s reasonable enjoyment of the land and the structures upon it.
I think you mean affect, unless the interference is the cause of the reasonable enjoyment.
But upvoted despite my grammar nazi tendencies for such an informative post.
Hmmm. I think AC has a point, albeit it doesn't mean we should all worship the introduction of censorship.
1) there is plenty of research on porn
2) this research supports the assertion that porn is getting more violent, and there is an association between more violent porn and sexual violence (note: not proving causation, but wiggling eyebrows suggestively etc etc)
3) a balance always needs to be struck between negative and positive freedoms (ie in this case freedom to enjoy porn, and freedom from sexual violence).
In summary, it's more complicated than humans want (on both sides). And *way* more complicated than politicians can deal with.
Oops...
I reiterate the (general) point though: when someone is hit by a vehicle, the damage to this person is proportional to KE and therefore to velocity squared. I have to patch them up afterwards, and wouldn't mind this workload being reduced.
Have a virtual one (this may have been the underlying cause of my error :)
I had assumed that reg readers would be aware kinetic energy = mv2, but clearly through all the posts above this is untrue.
I suppose another option is that reg readers presume that everyone else is so much less important than them that the risk of death/injury to unknowns is acceptable in order that they can speed.
There aren't too many other plausible alternatives.
And just to remind everyone (to gain additional downvotes with a further intrusion of reality) speeding fines aren't hypothecated.
I suspect there will be some Orwellian official phrase for hunger, eg Project for Nationwide Satiety Achievement. Same for the other terms.
And can I say how excited I am to recently find translations in all news about the Norks, rather than the transliterations that were previously used in a hamfisted colonial way to imply inferiority.
I suspect the psychological aspects on the other crewmembers would be problematic. Unless you're going to start with a threesome +/- swinging. And I don't think that NASA would continue to be funded by Congress (fnarr) if they spent money on sex, especially outside gravity marriage.
AFAIK orbital nookie hasn't happened; you'd promptly be world famous and rich forever.
""Atos...appears to have acted solely with its own short term best interests in mind".
I nominate this as a candidate for the award of the "Statement of the Bleedin' Obvious" for the year just ending."
I thought self interest was supposed to invoke the magical invisible hand, which would promptly solve all problems, create jobs, drive the economy, hide the poor, prevent floods, make Europe go away, etc etc. Have I got this wrong?
Yours,
Gideon Osborne
Unfortunately in the current disaster that is US politics (ie partisanship overruling governing), this story will be perceived as far more important than a mere surveillance state watching the people. The "story" of Obama spying on republicans is too "easy" and will just be accepted by those without an interest in either surveillance or politics (ie the vast majority).
We can of course all hope that this will do spectacular damage to the NSA, thereby helping to restore freedom on the web and all round happiness...
Basic examples and without giving any opinion on the story itself, 1000's of refugees/migrants shut motorway and cause problems on channel tunnel, 100's of thousands of refugees/migrants head to Europe.
So, is the reporting initially of these stories or the subsequent unreporting of these stories the false version?
[top tip: your answer reveals your political leanings, unless you personally have evidence. Obviously given the way you've phrased the question your leaning are already revealed; in all likelihood mine are by posting this "in opposition" to you... you put it perfectly: sad but true, the human condition]
Indeed. For most people, a lightsaber held in their nondominant hand is likely to be the deadliest weapon they encounter in their life, as they'll promptly slice themselves in half.
Assuming that everyone else is as cackhanded as me, that is.
Does anyone really believe big intelligence services would follow guidelines even of their governments said they would?
No, but it gives you a big stick to beat them with if they are found out. This makes them somewhat more cautious (assuming there is a risk of them being caught - and this is hard to calculate).
Beer, cos it's better (and healthier*) than worrying more.
* I worry a lot about this.
They need to make a lot of profit before their share price becomes realistic. I doubt that your suggestion of 1 in 100 plausible; I also would point out if you invest in a billion dollar company you don't win as you have a small investment (0.000 000 01% of the company if I've counted my decimals correctly).
You're right about the stock options. The other stuff; not so much. Spreading your risk by investing in multiple unicorns simply means that you'll get less return on your investment - like spending more on lottery tickets in order to get a higher chance of winning. Doesn't alter the foolish nature of playing the lottery... Andreessen can invest as he has lots of money to do so and he is (presumably) analysing the companies to a greater degree than is likely to take place on El Reg's forums, illustrious though they are.
Underwhelming, and I think we forget just how incapable of understanding the issues many are. This is not as they are stupid (much as it is easy to attribute every failure to this) but that they simply lack knowledge to such an extent they don't even realise they lack knowledge. Dunning Kruger effects...
It reminds me of Tony Blair's assertion that we should stop child porn by examining *every* picture posted to the internet before allowing it to be viewed in Britain. Admittedly that was in the early 2000s rather than these heady social media days, but still.
Beer, the best way of coping with politicians and their thoughts.
I think the commentards here have missed the point: yugguy isn't advocating this approach, just pointing out that it can be used as an effective tactic. It is illegal for exactly the same reason (and that it's somewhat regressive to punish the weakest members of any group by giving them the alternatives of being outcasts or forced to comply with group norms).
I'm always unimpressed by "genetic evidence, so it must be true!" arguments. The phylogenetics (your DNA analysis) has its own flaws and assumptions. Diagnostic lesions would seem to be the basis of diagnosis (alright, microbiological evidence would be better), so it is reasonable to believe that they are a higher standard of proof than extrapolating current genomes backwards in time.
Just cos something's expensive and high tech doesn't make it right.
If this circa 1415 skeleton really does have diagnostic lesions, they could have been caused by yaws, or less likely, by bejel.
Respectfully, that's bollocks.
Although as you say there are other trepanomal diseases, syphilis is the only one spread congenitally (ie vertical transmission from mother to child) and the only one known to cause dental issues. In particular, these characteristic dental appearances in combination are sufficient to make the diagnosis. And all 4 are not just treatable but eminently eradicable these days; the issues are more to do with providing health care systems to non rich, non powerful people for the others and stigma for syphilis.
I'm reminded of Mill's single black swan disproving 'all swans are white'. Not that this finding is particularly unexpected; the evidence is mixed both ways.