Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:The one-paragraph summary contrains several err (Score 1) 80

ULA didn't even exist 50 years ago.

But the components of ULA did. All they did was change the name.

People die and institutional knowledge dies with them.

But a significant amount of institutional knowledge live on.

There are models for this. Given Falcon 9's past launch record it probably has a reliability rate of 90% or more.

When you can chose between 90% and closer to 100% which would you chose when dealing with very expensive payloads.

But it seems their launch manifest is quite full with orders so it seems the insurance companies disagree with your perspective.

You must really be an insider to know the insurances charged for each Space X launch. You have nothing to back up those statements. For all you know these launches have no insurance. Again, it may be an issue of supply and demand. Companies need satellites launched to keep business going. They may take a higher risk option to stay in business.

Comment Re: What did you expect? (Score 2) 197

Can you tell the difference between foreign data and data stored in the US?

The software giant has been battling U.S. prosecutors for data held in its Dublin, Ireland datacenter, which it says cannot be accessed or retrieved by a U.S. search warrant.

If the data is held in the US the Us warrant has jurisdiction and the Microsoft battle does not apply.

Comment Re:The one-paragraph summary contrains several err (Score 1) 80

Still did not stop the DoD from launching a really expensive satellite on it right on the next flight

There was no other option at the time. It was either a Delta IV Heavy or it didn't get launched.

Fact is Falcon 9 also has an 'impeccable' launch record.

And a much shorter one. Five of those were Falcon 1.0 and nine were Falcon 1.1. The Falcon 9 Heavy has not even launched yet. ULA has been launching for over 50 years; Space X less than 5.

Comment Re:Not a fan (Score 1) 304

Under about 30 feet, you should be able to stay close to the middle of the road and avoid them, even if you don't accelerate, assuming a 9 foot wide lane.

Given 1 foot clearance on each side of the vehicle and a vehicle width of 5 feet gives a 3 foot clearance for the pedestrian. It the pedestrian is in the 3 foot area in the middle of the lane there is not enough room to go around. Many accidents are causes when pedestrians panic at seeing the approaching vehicle and stop in the middle of the lane.

At every cross walk, *you* should be looking both ways for pedestrians liable to cross.

You are assuming visibility is perfect at all crosswalks. There are many obstructions such as parked vehicles, telephone poles, other people, etc that obstruct your view of crossing pedestrians. If you add night, rain and/or dark clothing it gets even worse. In one instance I was traveling in the same direction as a pedestrian who was playing with his phone. He turned left into a crosswalk without stopping or even looking. How was I supposed to anticipate that move? Luckily I had time to stop. Had I been ten feet closer we would have hit.

I don't see how you can defend not stopping and looking before entering a crosswalk. Yes, some drivers need to be more attentive but some pedestrians need to be more attentive as well.

Comment Re:Lift? (Score 0) 83

if you rotate the blades 10x as fast as you do on Earth, you'll get the same lift.

Sorry you are off by a factor of 10. Ten time faster rotation means ten times the lift not 100 times.

That said, gravity on Mars is 1/3rd as much as Earth, so you only need 1/3rd the lift. So rotating the blades at 6x the rate you'd rotate them on Earth would be sufficient.

The more accurate numbers are 100 *.38 = 38. So the rotors would have to rotate 38 times as fast.

Comment Re:Not a fan (Score 1) 304

Just because one technology has issues has no bearing on whether or not an completely different technology has issues.

As for your "attentive and skilled driver" point, there are times when that is not good enough. For example, I was driving at a 2 second interval behind a van. It made a quick lane change. In front of it was another van. It took me a second to realize that van was not moving. It had no lights showing at all. I nearly hit it A braking asist device would have kicked in immediately when it calculated that I would hit the stationary van.

Comment Re:Not a fan (Score 1) 304

And so it's not uncommon to hear statements like he "came out of nowhere," when in fact the pedestrian was crossing legally.

The pedestrian may have been crossing legally but at a time where the driver could not stop. Say I am driving legal limit of 30 mph down the road. The typical stopping distance is 75ft. What happens if the pedestrian enters the crosswalk when I am less than 75ft away? The pedestrian may have the right of way but the vehicle still could not stop in time.

There was one instance where a police car was approaching with lights an siren flashing. A pedestrian though she could beat the police car by dashing across the crosswalk. She didnt notice the car ther the cruiser was chasing till it hit her.

I have seen too many stupid pedestrian moves. Crosswalks are not magic shields that stop all vehicles. What ever happend to stop and look both ways before crossing? Pedestrian need to take responsibility for their own safety.

Slashdot Top Deals

I've noticed several design suggestions in your code.

Working...