So sending atomic bombs (which would be more or less useless against an asteroid anyway
It was my understanding that the radiation (heat and nuclear) from a blast near an asteroid would cause rapid ablation of the surface material, enough to change its trajectory. It might take several blasts to achieve a safe heading for the asteroid but it is possible.
I don't think actually attempting to 'blow up' an asteroid has ever been an option.
-b
Females tend to help each other to feel good.
Go ahead and take this with a grain of salt, since this is only one person's experience.
Here is the timeline of my experience in basic training in the air force (not too long ago):
-Put your bag down! Pick your bag up! (equal response)
-Goddammit you need ta march with yer feet hitting the same beat HUP TWO TREE FOR (women win by miles)
-You need ta help your bunkmate get 'is SHIT TOGETHER! (men win by a landslide, as the sister flight is already getting into micropolitics)
-I want your shirts aligned to the micrometer and I want your marching to be in step to the yottasecond! (by this time, the women are falling into factions)
-Graduation is tomorrow, don't f*&^ing embarrass me! (and by now, the women have split into camps while the men have unified)
I agree with what you said up until about 3 weeks into a project. After that, the men catch up on the unified front level and the women fall behind because of the clique thing. I'm not going to say that one side is better since both genders have their strengths, but ask any drill instructor: Women hate each other by the end of boot, and men create life-long bonds. That's generalization but one that fits 90%+ of the people I've known.
-b
But brilliant women who are not passionate about the field are smart enough to tell us all to go fuck ourselves after the first serious flame, because they know nobody should have to put up with that shit.
This is understood. The question is "Why?"
-b
Since I'm only 27 my perspective might be skewed, but...
All the single guys I know work ungodly hours for little pay. All the single women I know work ungodly hours for little pay. The difference is that the guys work in aerospace and the women work for assisted living facilities. (I should point out that the women earn way more pay than the men...)
I think there is more to this than bachelorhood.
-b
I guess the really interesting question is *Why* are the applied sciences/mechanical/IT careers associated with males. Most of the posts here say the same thing: Nerd careers appeal to males. Why? Nursing is a totally nerdy career- there is a lot to memorize, complex physical procedures, etc. Teaching is a totally nerdy career- why are there more females in teaching?
Off the cuff, I'd say that IT and the mechanical arts are more demanding of attention/reward than the traditionally 'female' careers of teaching/nursing/secretarial arts. I might even go as far as to say that instead of women shunning 'technology' careers, men are more likely to shun the 'thankless' careers I mentioned above. Maybe men seek, nay, demand appreciation and public spoils for the hard-gotten sacrifice of becoming skilled at their obscure trade.
That raises the whole question of why teachers/nurses/secretaries don't get the appreciation their jobs deserve, and thus the discussion devolves into so much posturing...
I joined the military. Not only do women get equal pay and equal positions, they don't have to work as hard to get them[1]. Still, the military is comprised mostly of men. Go figure.
-b
Perkilo?
They are, in fact, very quiet. I worked a few hundred yards from the runway and unless the wind was blowing just right, I couldn't hear them take off or land. Even up close (30 feet) they are quiet. They are much quieter than the small single-engine plane you might be familiar with flying overhead here in the states. There are also some design features that help to block engine noise and heat signature from the ground. Also, they fly primarily at night for a bunch of reasons, but primarily that our enemies worked at night. I don't know about afghanistan, but in iraq the dust makes it difficult to see a predator at 20k+ ft during the day.
Like I said earlier, I have a good number of hours spent in the control room watching insurgents carry on about their business with no idea that we were watching. I have personally been there watching as the crew followed vehicle tracks leading away from a warm mortar tube, etc and so on. I'd try to find a good video of the predator in action but I'm at work and all the video sites are blocked (yet somehow not
-b
On the general topic at hand: I have found that, while ads are getting creepier as to how much they clearly know about you, they are getting to be more useful to me personally.
I keep getting an ad in the facebook sidebar for "Woman looking for bigger guys". What the hell are you implying, facebook?
As an aside, you can get rid of a lot of ads by using an effective hosts file. I still see more ads in opera and safari than I do in FF, but nowhere near the amount that I see on my work PC (with unmodified hosts file).
-b
It's also likely that our SIGINT people could detect these operations and... er... neutralize them. The UAVs are only part of a huge web of intel gathering operations, and even irregularities as minor as our tars pods picking up stuff that our predators never see would be noticed. Like most
-b
You have underestimated the capability of U.S. UAVs. If you are being watched, you will not know. You can't hear them, you can't see them, and you can't hide from them. We can see people hiding under tarps or bushes- we can even see where you've been walking or driving, which vehicles have been used lately, and where a mortar has been fired. We can tell if you've been running, and where you have run from. We can see a gun and can tell if it's been fired lately. We can follow fresh tire tracks for miles.
In short, having access to a UAV's video feed would be a huge deal to our opponents. Not to mention that even if you knew there was a UAV overhead, you'd have no way of knowing what it's looking at (sensors have 360 degree coverage but like any camera, it can only look at one thing at a time.
I became a believer in the capabilities of the Predator/Reaper from seeing them in action first-hand.
-b
When I stream from pandora or last.fm, the rate is indeed between 12-20 Kbps. I'm listening right now and since I started paying attention a few minutes ago, the speed has never exceeded 22.0 Kbps.
-b
Heh...
I've been working on military aircraft for the past 8 years or so. I have gleaned some insights that the average flyer might not have about jet engines. I was not present for this incident:
http://www.dauntless-soft.com/PRODUCTS/Freebies/AAEngine/
-b
One little nitpick with your comment (assuming that the gist of it was that composite a/c aren't more dangerous than Al a/c): A pinhole, ok 'small hole', will not kill people. I've worked on aircraft of all sizes and shapes and none of them were air-tight. The cabin air system is perfectly capable of maintaining pressure despite pinholes or small leaks in the airframe. The vinyl decals applied to aircraft are even designed with this in mind- decals placed over pressurized areas are perforated to allow leaking air to escape.
Basically, unless someone in the cabin can feel the 300+ KTAS wind coming through a hole, you'll be fine.
Additionally, the pilots (especially) and the passengers (to a more limited extent) are provided with oxygen in the event of cabin depressurization. You won't die at 30k feet, you'll just wake up at 15k feet before the emergency landing that your woefully underpaid pilots managed to coordinate in the face of anoxia, fear, and task saturation.
-b
1. If you are flying inverted in a 787, you are doing it wrong.
2. All aircraft do this to a greater or lesser degree. Watch a video of a b-52 taking off- the wings literally look like they are flapping.
3. The flexibility of the wings is actually a selling point- it increases the fuel efficiency. Several in-service airliners have very flexible wings; look out the window the next time you fly. 6-8 feet of flex (measured at the wingtip) is not unusual at all.
4. An aluminum wing flexing this much will crack much, much sooner than a graphite wing.
-b, 8 years in aerospace maintenance
Your confidence in aluminum is misplaced.
Watch the stress test of the 787's wings:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bV_V4U0iX4w
I am an aircraft structural maintenance craftsman.
-b
After a number of decimal places, nobody gives a damn.
