I am jsut stating that it should help. A bit. In fact in a link above it is shown as a counter measure, as well as rotating the balistic projectile. Both combined would make it far far easier to avoid the laser burning thru... For a much cheaper price than such a lser system itself.

If you have a reflectance of X% for the wavelength considered, that means 100-X% is absorbed. Granted I am not sure how the reflectance of materials is at short wavelength but the weapon considered are at long wavelength compared to visible (the weapon considered seems to be around 1 to 2 micrometer in the near infrared https://fas.org/sgp/crs/weapon...). Source cite a reflectance of 94% to 98% for that wavelength for some type of mirror (silver mirror among others).

At such a 50kW Laser at 95% reflectance would mean 5% absorbance or only 2.5 kW. That means to give the same amount energy at the same distance for the same surface you need 20 time the same time. Or put in another way if you need to give 10.000 Joule to ablate that surface , you would need 4 seconds exposition rather than 1/4 of a seconds for a non reflective surface.

So where do I make an error ? Where do you see that the mirror would quickly lose the ability to reflect compared to exposure time ? Keep in mind that in the case of a balistic projectile, you only need to make sure the laser do not pierce the skin long enough that targeting would be hard. I do not see why you keep telling reflectance has no impact on such laser. It certainly has an impact on how much kW will the target absorb.

All science does is look backward (gather data points of past experience) then construct a model which enables us to look forward. And that is the problem. If there is no predictability power , then you are not making science, you are reading entrail of fish.

The arugment OTOH could be "those with a brain allowing them to see glass pane, do get a survival and reproduction advantage, those who don't , have a higher chance of dying before reproduction thus the glass window generate a natural selection of birds". Also I am doubtful of that. I do not recall any study showing that bird start to see reflective surface as glass pane rather than continuation of their habitat. Would you have a cite ?

"Problem is this is hard to prove, and I doubt anybody would do any further serious research into it. Why won't they?"
There is research in such a stuff, but mostly from public university and as with all orphan disease not very much. The reason that it is not done is because there are so many research point and at the end of the day you have got to limit yourself to what you can find a funding for. The fact that you found a pubmed article belies your claim that nobody would research it. The simple truth, is that sometimes some stuff will simply through bad luck not be researched.

I have watched it, and I know the story as shown, but there are a lot of symbolism which escapes me.

"agile team lead themselves". We tried that. Gave outline. And the agile developer used that to explain them being much slower than estimated because the spec are not deep detailed enough. And then test were dropped in favor of coding. Yeah sure. Excuse are invented to be used. Too much micromanagement. not enough micromanagement. So yeah. You'll excuse me if I see I am skeptical.

It's just from breathing Google's hot air for too long. Don't worry, I've quit.

I guess you haven't tried to actually use a Google product from the inside. Fundamentally broken, obvious and repeatable bugs have gone unfixed for years, but as they tell us: "they're working on it." (cough[Shopping]cough)

If it's in a Google car, they'll claim it isn't evil, while being really underhanded (cough[IP rights]cough), but it won't work right (cough[Shopping]cough), and just as you you commit a significant amount of resources to it, they'll either discontinue it (cough[cough]cough) or sideline it. Or never, ever add the features that would make it something actually reasonable (cough[Gmail]cough) Or simply blow out the decent features (cough[Maps]cough) Or never bother to bring it to a level of performance that is even moderately reasonable (cough[Google+]cough)

Unless it never becomes popular. In that case, it might hang around forever. But still under-performing / broken / evil, etc.

No, I'm not bitter. I love when a company wastes my time as if it's worth nothing. Finally I realized that trying to work with Google was making my time worth nothing. So in a way, they had the right idea from the start.

The only car analogy I can come up with is the insufficiently Humvees the government gave our soldiers to drive over IEDs in.

Not a tech dinosaur.

A tech prokaryote-like organism from the Archean.

1) the quote was never disputed by the WH, the staff at the epoch or bush himself. In fact if you read what rob sherman reported afterward instead of deniying the WH tries to justify that what Bush said won't affect policy. They would not state that if it was a false quote.
2) it is typical of the christian conservative of the epoch to think something similar
3) it is a step up from the definition of atheist as "wicked , godless" the albeit archeic but previous definition.


Frankly it would have been easy to debunk this from the WH. But they always avoided to even take a stance or denie it. As for the point of the other journalist not hearing it, how many of them simply dismissed it as a campaign wink at his conservative base ? And simply did not see it as news ? Heck if you do not pay too much attention all you get is "we are christian nation blah blah one nation under gods - OK not reporting worth he is pandering". The atheist things could have been misheard by Sherman , but Bush and co never denied having said this. in fact IIRC later he said in 2004 something similar in the imius morning radio show about the elligibility of an atheist.


So suck it troll.

After that whether it is aol, gmx, or gmail only matter to hipster. Email has to work. It has to support pop3 and imap and whatever. It does not have to be from a specific domain. Stating aol=dinosaur is being blind to the fact that this is only a domain after the @. It does not reflect anything on the user.

"Bush: No, I don't know that atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered patriots. This is one nation under God."

The language of the GP was inflamatory.... But keep in mind we were deep throated during the last decades with scores of politician calling us second class citizen, or worst. See also scalia's 2014 speech in university of colorado's christian university.

Before launch you have connector to which you connect a computer and you can do a self diagnose on the satellite using that connection to the on board system. There is no reason to dedicate leds and leds wiring for that especially that you will need to check for many fail conditions.

Old guy. For the same gameplay enjoyment, I will take a nice graphic over pixelized art. I will accept pixelized art only if the gameplay is superior to the non pixelized one. But as you note , this is an acceptance of a lower visual technology for the sake of better gameplay. In absence of better gameplay, screw hold on from dark ages.