The original screws were probably bronze, not brass. Bronze has no appreciable zinc while brass contains a lot of zinc. Immersed in sea water, brass will dezincify and corrode.
Most marine raw water systems use bronze fittings for this reason.
Stainless isn't suitable for below the waterline applications because the chromium can't form a protective oxidization layer due to the lack of oxygen exposure.
Your boat would have sunk with brass or stainless screws.
Hm. The covenant of Noah is about two paragraphs before this part (King James Version) which is used for various justifications of slavery and discrimination against all sorts of people because they are said to bear the Curse of Ham. If folks wanted to use the Bible to justify anything ISIS says is justified by God's words in the Koran, they could easily do so.
18 And the sons of Noah, that went forth of the ark, were Shem, and Ham, and Japheth: and Ham is the father of Canaan.
19 These are the three sons of Noah: and of them was the whole earth overspread.
20 And Noah began to be an husbandman, and he planted a vineyard:
21 And he drank of the wine, and was drunken; and he was uncovered within his tent.
22 And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brethren without.
23 And Shem and Japheth took a garment, and laid it upon both their shoulders, and went backward, and covered the nakedness of their father; and their faces were backward, and they saw not their father's nakedness.
24 And Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his younger son had done unto him.
25 And he said, Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren.
26 And he said, Blessed be the Lord God of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant.
27 God shall enlarge Japheth, and he shall dwell in the tents of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant.
I don't think people understand the Unix philosophy. They think it's about limiting yourself to pipelines, but it's not. It's about writing simple robust programs that interact through a common, relatively high level interface, such as a pipeline. But that interface doesn't have to be a pipeline. It could be HTTP Requests and Responses.
The idea of increasing concurrency in a web application through small, asynchronous event handlers has a distinctly Unix flavor. After all the event handlers tend to run top to bottom and typically produce an output stream from an input stream (although it may simply modify one or the other or do something orthogonal to either like logging). The use of a standardized, high level interface allows you to keep the modules weakly coupled, and that's the real point of the Unix philosophy.
I think he's off his meds again.
I'd love to let them have the run of things for a while, except they insist on flying planes into our buildings and beheading children.
With that logic, we should go to war with our ally Saudi Arabia as well.
Saudi nationals have flown more planes into buildings than ISIS.
The Saudi Government has beheaded more people than ISIS.
(Though ISIS seems to be trying to catch up)
No, I think the only option is to go in and kill every last one of them, like the vermin infestation that they are.
The language of dehumanization is ugly.
I'm glad that Western governments have abandoned it as a propaganda tool.
I can only hope that some of the less evolved citizens of the West will abandon it as well.
Admiral Rogers, I know this is harder for you than it is for a civilian, but you've really gotta stop conflating "legal" with "ethical." And if you can't do that, I can sympathize, but could you at least stop conflating "legal" with "in the interests of the United States?"
You should read what he said again.
I try to remind people that the all judgement to date find that the NSA has abided by the law. We have not been found to attempt to undermine the law.
He didn't say that the NSA abides by the law, only that no court has judged them as acting illegally.
The NSA's warrantless wiretapping was nakedly illegal and unconstitutional, but so far (AFAIK) no Judge has taken a case to its conclusion.
And Congress passed the FISA Amendments Act of 2008 to retroactively shield the telecom companies for their participation.
The NSA has even admitted to "overcollection" under the 2008 law, but the details are classified, so no one can claim standing to sue.
The NSA knows they've repeatedly broken the law; what's impressive is the rearguard action they've maintained to prevent & delay legal action.
I don't really understand the political or economic motivations of Scottish independence.
The political side would make more sense if Scotland was greatly different than UK culturally and had a significant short-term history of English subjugation. The Scots really aren't an ethnic or racial grouping, except at some micro level and don't seem to have a serious complaint regarding discrimination on language or religious grounds.
The economics make less sense -- Scotland has been economically integrated with the larger UK for a long time. Had Scotland split off in 1850, it would have been at a time when economies were smaller and much more locally self sufficient and it would have had time to develop into something that The economy seems much more regional now and it will be a hard transition to a more standalone economy.
If a route needed to be blackholed because of a DDOS, and that action had to be approved of by a central authority, which could take days to weeks for a ruling, nothing could be done because routers would not accept changes to any route until then.
Why would you need permission to blackhole a route?
The problem is adding good routes, not dropping bad ones.
Could they encapsulate the retardant or water into some kind of non-flammable shell that would break open on impact? Sort of like giant water balloons or paintballs.
If so, they could repurpose some of the parked B-52s into "water bombers". It's not clear to my quickie referencing if this would be a net improvement in payload but it might be an improvement in payload delivery flexibility if you could choose to unload a partial load or make multiple passes. It looks like the DC10 has to dump the entire payload at once.
I would guess that loadout might be easier with a bulk tank than with bombs, but I think some models of the B52 could be loaded with "clips" of several bombs at once.
If you have a degree from a top liberal arts school and a working knowledge of the tech, many corps will hire you "to manage the MIT kids" whom they do not trust to get anything done on their own.
But, yes, the US has an unfortunate tendency, since the War of Independence, and the Civil War, continued to the present, of always fighting wars off budget.
That's not even remotely true.
The US has, for most of its history, levied taxes for the explicit purpose of paying for wars.
The Federal Government didn't exist during the Revolution, so the individual states raised taxes.
I'm not going to get into the nitty gritty of pre-20th century war taxes, because they were on things like slaves, carriages, sugar, and whiskey.
Just remember, every dollar you spend for something you don't need, is a dollar spent to help the Axis
To pay for the Korean War, Congress heaped taxes on top of the already high WWII rates.
President Johnson cut domestic spending and created surtaxes specifically to pay for Vietnam.
AFAIK, George W. Bush was the first President to categorically refuse to raise any taxes to pay for his wars.
It depends on your design goals.
In Asimov's story universe, the Three Laws are so deeply embedded in robotics technology they can't be circumvented by subsequent designers -- not without throwing out all subsequent robotics technology developments and starting over again from scratch. That's one heck of a tall order. Complaining about a corner case in which the system doesn't work as you'd like after they achieved that seems like nitpicking.
We do know that *more* sophisticated robots can designed make more subtle ethical systems -- which is another sign of a robust fundamental design. The simplistic ethics is what subsequent designers get when they get "for free" when they use an off-the-shelf positronic brain to control a welding robot or bread-slicing machine.
Think of the basic positronic brain design as a design framework. One of the hallmarks of a robust framework is that easy things are easy and hard things are possible. By simply using the positronic framework the designers of the bread slicing machine don't have to figure out all the ways the machine might slice a person's fingers off. The framework takes care of that for them.
I don't think you've really grasped Apple's design sensibility. Job one for the designers is to deliver a product that consumers want but can't get anywhere else.
The "camera bulge" may be a huge blunder, or it may be just a tempest in a teapot. The real test will be the user's reactions when they hold the device in their hand, or see it in another user's hand. If the reaction is "I want it", the designers have done their job. If it's "Holy cow, look at that camera bulge," then it's a screw-up.
The thinness thing hasn't been about practicality for a long, long time; certainly not since smartphones got thinner than 12mm or so. They always been practical things the could have given us other than thinness, but what they want you to do is pick up the phone and say, "Look how thin the made this!" The marketing value of that is that it signals that you've got the latest and greatest device. There's a limit of course, and maybe we're at it now. Otherwise we'll be carrying devices in ten years that look like big razor blades.
At some point in your life you'll probably have seen so many latest and greatest things that having the latest and greatest isn't important to you any longer. That's when know you've aged out of the demographic designers care about.
You can secure SMTP with TLS, can't you?
The hardest part of climbing the ladder of success is getting through the crowd at the bottom.
