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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:I never pretended it would help for a long time (Score 1) 185

by LordLimecat (#49724609) Attached to: Navy's New Laser Weapon: Hype Or Reality?

You spin and cool your weapons, and make them as reflective as practical and this system won't do any damage

I've never seen anyone agree with this assessment who has professed knowledge of the subject. The issue is that lasers still dump a lot of energy, which starts to mar the mirror really incredibly fast. 2.5kW of energy is like applying a soldering iron tip to the mirror, which rapidly (1s) causes it to mar and become useless. Not only that, atmospheric pollutants, water droplets, grease-- anything-- will make that part of the mirror useless. Applying mirrors to your turrets? Good luck keeping them clean with all of the gunsmoke coming out of them.

Meanwhile the defender has the burden of carrying all of this extra weight (not really feasible with aircraft, seacraft, or missiles) and trying desperately to keep it clean in battlefield conditions, plus all of the added expense for an armor that is, at best, marginally useful.

If your enemy is having to adopt incredibly expensive, incredibly hard to maintain, and marginally effective countermeasures to your weapon, then your weapon is doing its job. It really doesnt matter whether you blow up 10 of the enemy's ships, or whether their countermeasures have meant they could build 10 fewer ships; the outcome is the same.

Comment: Re:Is that even correct ? (Score 1) 185

by LordLimecat (#49719903) Attached to: Navy's New Laser Weapon: Hype Or Reality?

Because a 2.5kW laser is still sufficient to burn things, and once the mirror starts to lose reflectance it will start down a path of exponentially reducing reflectance.

That is,
0.0s - 0.1s: 95% reflectance
0.1s - 0.2s: 90% reflectance
0.2s - 0.3s: 80% reflectance
0.3s - 0.4s: 60%
0.4s - 0.5s: 20%

Etc. Source: Numbers are made up and hypothetical.

Comment: Re: USA in good company... (Score 1) 648

I guess you're so unwilling to understand the opposing view point that you're perfectly ready to believe in a caricature of it. The person you responded to is an AC, clearly setting up a strawman, and has baited several of you into attacking it.

Congrats to the AC, you've successfully trolled several people in this thread.

Comment: Re:USA in good company... (Score 1) 648

He's going to die eventually, and he thinks he's going to paradise.

If he were correct, then the thing he did would not be a wrong.

Obviously we believe he is incorrect, and that what he did WAS wrong, and as justice relies on a concept of proportionality, death seems like the appropriate response.

Comment: Re:USA in good company... (Score 1) 648

I would contend that less than the death penalty here would be to de-value the lives of those he killed. Taking another's life is too serious of a crime to punish by any lesser measure.

You might recall that we have a justice system, and that justice is generally defined by punishments meted out in proprotion to their crime. What punishment would be more just than death for one who has killed many?

Comment: Re:Entire OS in about 1/3 of i7 Cache (Score 1) 368

On the flipside for anything remotely complex like printing you would expect it to be riddled with bugs and about 5-10 years behind everyone else. Lacking subsystems means creating 3rd party apps for it will be "fun": sounds like a return to DOS days. Which I guess is good news for me, because I never got to experience them in their heyday, so I can see firsthand what instability looks like when you dont have OS provided APIs for things.

Comment: Re:Worse, no Unix or POSIX either (Score 2) 368

That sounds like theyve been actively un-learning all of the lessons the computer science field has spent decades learning.

Here everyone else has been learning how abstraction can promote collaboration and keep bugs simple, and theyve found a way to justify removing abstraction as a way to reduce complexity (lol?).

One good suit is worth a thousand resumes.

Working...