Actually, Beta is really good and it is just Slashdot's evil competitors paying shills to badmouth it that is convincing everyone it is evil incarnate. Shills, shills everywhere!
I do find that highly ironic, although probably unavoidable in this kind of thing. In showing that this training material exists, but without evidence of specific targets or operations, Greenwald's article is effectively following the guidance laid out there. Just look at this comment section - anyone who does not toe the party line will simply be accused of being a shill from here on out, with reference to these documents as "proof". No longer is there any need to pay attention to dissenting opinions (on either side of an issue) - anyone disagreeing with you can be dismissed as just another shill.
So, business as usual on the internet.
Radon is generally only an issue in poorly ventilated areas, usually cellars or basements where the radioactive gas can build up. These are rare in California in general, and unlikely on Treasure Island where groundwater is present at ~4-8 feet below the ground surface. Direct exposure to radiation, especially through inhalation or ingestion of radioactive dust, is probably a bigger issue.
Just toss it in the bay; with the radiation plume arriving from Japan, no one will ever notice!
The article, at least, is talking about hypersonic re-entry vehicles launched on ICBMs (as that is what China has tested recently). They are basically just "highly" maneuverable re-entry vehicles, designed to approach their target at a flatter trajectory compared to traditional warheads, with some limited maneuvering capability. The point being to avoid the problems of a ballistic trajectory that makes your impact point obvious to anyone looking, complicating interception. Again, the article at least isn't discussing low-level hypersonic missiles, as thus far no one has really had any luck making something like that work.
Actually, what IS new is the low level nature of the hypersonic missiles and the massively increased range. Air to Air weapons are pretty limited in range, the new crop of missiles that they are discussing are just faster versions of cruse missiles that have intercontinental range.
Actually, the hypersonic missiles that are anything other than drawing-board hopes and dreams at this point are more like ICBMs than cruise missiles. They look an awful lot like ICBMs at launch, but don't go as high and basically glide in at hypersonic speeds, taking a flatter trajectory on reentry rather than the near-vertical profile of a ballistic missile. Makes it harder to figure out where they are going to hit because they don't follow a ballistic trajectory (by following the launch and mid-phase of an ICBM you can pretty much tell where it is going to hit because it follows a ballistic profile - even an ICBM with a MIRV warhead can only hit targets within a relatively small area with its reentry vehicles), but they still launch high enough for relatively easy detection compared to cruise missiles, which stay entirely within the atmosphere, and generally stay quite low.
I don't see a whole lot of use for the gigabit speed right now, you're right. The biggest thing I see is the symmetrical connection, and significantly lower prices than competitors at similar speeds. 1000/1000 may not be all that useful in the vast majority of cases unless you have a lot of people sharing the bandwidth, but 100/100 for the same price as the 15/1.5 I'm limited to now would be huge. Online backup would be nearly transparent (it took about 3 weeks on my connection, and that was only backing up the "important" stuff - plus actually utilizing the 1.5 upstream brings the downstream bandwidth to a crawl on my Uverse connection, making it an exceedingly tedious process - can't stream netflix or even just browse the web without hiccups), it would no longer be a pain to upload videos or high-res photos to share with family and friends, etc.
I'd probably go with the gigabit service if it was available where I live, but I think the real impact of Google Fiber is the pricing pressure it puts on slower connections that are eminently usable right now (even if Google is currently cherry-picking places they can do things cheaply).
I guess, but he's only going from 7.5 seconds (1995 Civic Si) 0-60 to about 6.8 seconds (2013 Mustang V6 automatic), so only about a 10% improvement. I think the overall improvement from a HDD to a SSD is significantly more than that. Now if you said a mid-90s Civic LX to a new Mustang GT you might have a better point.
Yeah, the summary is inaccurate (surprise, surprise). Benefit to National Defense is one of several or statements, not a requirement for all NSF funded research. The whole thing is still really stupid and betrays a complete lack of understanding of basic research and the mission of the NSF, but that's to be expected of Lamar Smith (R-TX), nincompoop extraordinaire.
Company makes billions of dollars; wants more. Competitors not happy.
Translation: "They're doing what we would do, but they're a lot better at it than we are."
You never know how the EC will react, tho.
Of course you do. Their thought process goes something like this:
Hmm, is it a European company? No. Is there a European company that might, some day, in some form, offer a competitive product? Yes.
if you can pull off all three at the same time, that grants you the power up of mega-Streisand
What would Brian Boitano do??
You can spot the downfall of Lucasarts when during the opening graphics of X-Wing vs Tie-Fighter between the iconic logo's, there was a silly little bi-plane animation of a the 3rd party studio that got involved. And while the game offered some intresting new features, it just couldn't hold a candle to the solid quality of its ancestors. Some more disasters followed until the company was reduced to ordering totally unrelated companies to produce mods for other peoples games.
X-Wing and Tie-Fighter were both developed by a 3rd party, Totally Games.
Battlefield was never a single-player game, so bad example. Oh, the first ones had a single player mode, but it was just a bot match on the regular multi-player maps. They shouldn't have even bothered with the single player "campaign" in BF3. The problem with the launch of BF3 was that they'd horribly under-provisioned Origin, which they still haven't learned from. I find it really bizarre that these companies don't make use of the abundant flexible computing resources available, and design their login servers, at least, to make use of them for rapid scaling - obviously it wouldn't make sense to build their permanent hosting system to deal with peak launch-day traffic, but it shouldn't be that hard to design it so they can temporarily run instances on AWS or whatever.
Of course, another problem was that they made it much more expensive to host a server for the game (compared to BF, BF2, etc.; I never played the Bad Company games, don't know about those), so there were also insufficient servers to play on, all of them concentrated with a few hosting companies that couldn't really handle the load (from what I've heard).
They already have processors that easily handle the processing aspect, so I don't think that's really it. No, this is actually aimed at improving the quality of the video recorded. When you use a whole bunch of tiny, high-sensitivity sensors, you get a lot of noise in low-light conditions. You just aren't getting enough photons hitting each sensor to create a good signal - highly variable, noisy images are the result. You can overcome this somewhat by averaging a bunch of sensors together, but you're basically averaging a bunch of known bad data in hopes of creating good data, and the outcome is often much less than satisfactory. This doesn't matter so much in still photography, where you can just keep the shutter open a little longer to collect more photons, but in video there are limits to how long you can open your shutter for each frame.
By using larger sensors, each one is intercepting a lot more photons and given the same sensitivity constraints it will create a much better signal. Anandtech recently did an article relating to this, although they were looking at cell phone cameras and one company that is deliberately decreasing MP in exchange for larger sensors in order to improve image quality for stills and video (though it is a presentation one of their writers gave, and doesn't go into a whole lot of the theory of why fewer, larger sensors can give better results than more, smaller sensors).
Well duh, everyone knows the CIA has been in a state of undeclared war with Australia for decades, and clearly the best way to bring Australia down is by protecting their environment. I mean, have you seen Australia's environment? I figure another decade, two tops, and the nation of Australia will crumble from within due to the unrelenting assault by their natural environment, and China will be free to sweep in and exploit their natural resources.
What, did you think the CIA was working for the U.S.? Sheep.