Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Erm... (Score 1) 327

by ptrace (#33310656) Attached to: German Photog Wants to Shoot Buildings Excluded From Street View
I agree. As a matter of fact, the fact that a house or building is blurred-out will likely attract more attention from someone browsing Street View. This is similar to the fuss Barbara Streisand made about aerial photos of the Malibu coast that happened to include her house. The more noise she made about it, the more people flocked to the net to find out what the fuss was about. Thousands upon thousands of more people saw pictures of her house than ever would have had she just ignored it.

Comment: Re:Negative progress (Score 1) 366

by ptrace (#26807257) Attached to: The Flying Giant Is 40 Years Old
Actually.. Juan Trippe of PanAm pushed the double-decker concept. Boeing didn't want to do it. Joe Sutter, was the lead designer on the Boeing 747. From the Seattle PI: "Juan Trippe was double-decker-happy," Sutter recalled. Until the day Sutter invited Trippe and other Pan American executives to check out a double-decker mock-up Boeing had constructed. Boeing boss Bill Allen took Trippe and his party up to the top of the mock-up. Sutter stayed below -- way below. Sutter wanted Trippe to try an emergency slide that had been set up from the upper deck. Trippe refused and quickly came back down the shaky stairs. Trippe was then taken to single-deck mock-up with the wide cabin that would become the hallmark of the 747 interior. "He walked into that wide single-deck mock-up, and he didn't say a word," Sutter recalled. "But you knew that was the way he wanted to go." There was one last visit that day, to a mock-up of the cockpit, which would be situated above the main cabin. For aerodynamic reasons, Boeing had created a large empty space just behind the cockpit. It would become the 747's signature hump. Sutter recalled that Trippe turned to John Borger, a Pan Am engineer, and asked what the space was for. Borger replied that it could be used for crew rest, Sutter recalled. "This will be for passengers," Trippe replied. Sutter was against a full double-deck 747 design for two main reasons. He was worried about slide interference with the wings from the upper deck in case of an emergency evacuation. And the two-deck design would leave little room for the 747 to carry a lot of cargo in its belly.

Comment: Re:Roads do nasty things to vehicles (Score 1) 315

by ptrace (#26416507) Attached to: Flying Car Ready To Take Off
I can guarantee that the FAA will not let the owner 'skip' maintenance. Servicing (annuals) are mandated by the FAA and they are far more stringent than anything a car must go through. Since this vehicle is treated like an airplane, it must have follow the same service and inspection regimen as an airplane, otherwise you won't be allowed to fly it (legally). All the people who purchased the Terrefugia are pilots and/or former aircraft owners. They know this. Aircraft are maintained to a much higher standard than automobiles. Much of the private aircraft fleet is >30 years old and still airworthy... this is due to stringent inspection requirements. Engines are overhauled at mandated intervals and major parts are swapped when they hit their useful life. I have a 30 year-old Grumman Tiger that is easily in better shape than the typical 5 year-old automobile. The average yahoo will not be able to fly a Terrafugia. The true everyman aircar is still many years away.

Comment: Re:It's a hoax, people. (Score 1) 219

by ptrace (#25232643) Attached to: Hikers May Have Found Fossett Items
I've now seen other articles with pictures of the certificate and it is the new "credit card" style. It's true that you can look up airman info on the FAA database, but it will not divulge the certificate number. If it has address, vitals and matches his certificate number as verified by the FAA, I would say it's genuine or a very sophisticated hoax.
Hardware Hacking

+ - Apple Limits iPhone Sales to Two Per Customer->

Submitted by ptrace
ptrace (1078855) writes "Apple is limiting purchases of their iPhone to two (2) per person... Not two per transaction, two per PERSON. iPhones will only be purchasable by credit card (No cash, no checks) so they can track your purchases. According to the article, this is being done to cut down on the "unlocker's" market. Apple's official stance is that, "limiting iPhone sales to two per customer helps us ensure that there are enough iPhones for people who are shopping for themselves or buying a gift."

Is Apple limiting purchases to be fair to customers or are they just protecting their $9/month kickback from AT&T?"

Link to Original Source

Gee, Toto, I don't think we're in Kansas anymore.

Working...