Maybe they should keep the metadata about the metadata they've been collecting? Meta-metadata or is that more like an infinite loop, metadata about metadata is also metadata?
Not to mention University of Warwick, University of Wales, University of Worcested and University of Warsaw all of which use UW to various degrees.
their was a coup/revolution as such all such treaties are null and void
No, that need not be the case, especially if most of the signatories to the treaty weren't involved in the revolution such as is the case with the so-called "Budapest Memorandum".
Why is the revolution is recognised in Kiev but one in Crimea isn't?
For me, because the first one isn't being controlled by a former KGB officer. Russia can elect whoever they want to higher office. But I still think they're a bit crazy to have elected Putin. And his fingerprints (as well as his motley army of henchmen) are all over the second "revolution".
Faster spin speeds are needed for faster random access on spinning media. If you want to be able to write to them faster, is it better to do a whole lot more engineering on both the drive and the discs to make them spin 10% faster, or to just find a way to squeeze in another write head?
I'm wondering how well prepared border control / custom agents are for taking down fast moving drones that sweep in pretty low.,
You're basically describing skeet shooting right there.
How long until drones are used to fly a prisoner out of prison?
Most of our existing justice system is based upon game theory. The idea is to dissuade criminals from doing their various crimes by causing them to balance the benefits of a successful heist against the penalties when they are caught. A simple example would be that bank robberies are very easy and generally net a fair amount of cash; and if done properly should be fairly low risk. So the idea is that you make the penalties huge with the hope that regular bank robbers will eventually slip up and then face a monster penalty. So even the average sociopath will think twice before saying, "stick'em up". But if you can reduce that risk to something resembling zero then your average intelligent sociopath should be out there causing all kinds of criminal mayhem.
I am willing to bet that before 2020 that we will see some very interesting crimes committed by drones, I am not talking crime of the century (although that is possible) but something where the drone was put to a very innovative use.
While what I am suggesting will be fun to read about; I am much more scared of the terroristic possibilities; again right now the only people who do the game theory on terrorism and think that the benefits outweigh the risks are either very stupid or very fanatical; these are circumstances that have generally kept terrorism as a fairly infrequent event. But again if you are changing the math so that being caught is no longer a near certainty then drone terrorism may very well become attractive to a slightly greater number of fruitcakes. I don't think there will be a tsunami of attacks but I am willing to bet that you will see a multiple of 2 or 3 times the number of serious attacks in normally stable countries.
But the sad part is that for the most part this type of technology will probably catch the public imagination and there will be all kinds of restrictions put on drone technology. The reality is that it will simply be another tool used by criminals and terrorists as the shoes they wear or the cellphones they call with.
National Pride and bureaucratic inertia are two factors which can keep some big project going well past it's Sell By date.
Except of course that British Airways was a private operation for more than 2/3rds of the life of the Concorde, and they flew it at a profit.
Why did Boeing cancel it's 2027 project? Why have there been no other SSTs (either European or American) since then?
Because they aren't economical.
More because people who are worried that they might not be economical and the companies behind this sort of development are risk averse (when they aren't on a government contract, anyway).
Anyway, why are we even discussing the blasted Concord? Can we just stop. It's a real thing, it operated for nearly three decades. You think it somehow proves something, I don't agree. We won't see eye to eye but who cares because the remaining Concordes are museum pieces now. I'd rather discuss the topic at hand.
This is the Handwavium:
you can just dig under the dirt a little and hit a layer of pure water ice
But what you wrote was:
This is the crux of the disagreement between us. You say it's hard but doable, whereas I think you're Mars mission relies on Handwavium to convert chemical transformation formulas into actual non-laboratory processes.
How is the availability of water on Mars therefore the handwavium? That's not what you meant when you wrote that and you know it. I'm going to have to assume that your information about extant efficient electrolysis systems was very out of date, but you finally looked it up and now you're trying to claim you were talking about water in that last sentence. It doesn't even make any sense for water to be what you were talking about.
A few shovel digs and up comes potable water?
You can't just keep misrepresenting what I'm saying. I didn't say shovel digs, although there are certainly places where you could reach the ice with a shovel, or maybe just a broom to sweep off some of the soil. The use of powered equipment would only make sense, even if only to haul it. I'm also not saying that you could just do it anywhere. Clearly you have to choose your location so that you have access to a usable source of water if you want it to be this easy. I'm also not saying "up comes potable water" which implies that the water will be liquid and have nothing dissolved in it.
What I'm saying is that we've already found spots, within range of areas that are suitable for a base, that have, at the very least, millions of kilograms of concentrated water ice. We've been able to identify these spots specifically because the ground over the ice in these spots is thin. That means it can be dug up, cut it into blocks, thrown into the back of a truck and driven back to the base. Then it can be melted, purified as needed (using the consumable supplies I mentioned way, way back) and used to make oxygen, as raw material for fuel-making or concrete or other chemical processes or just used for drinking, re-hydrating food, growing food, brushing teeth, etc.
There just isn't that much mystery about how you would do it. We're still not as sure about all the ideal sites for it, but we know some already (and remember, this is only if you want to do it the really easy way, there's water in plenty of other places too, it's just not in the form of almost pure ice. The exact equipment and techniques you would use are still up for debate and experiment as well. Traditional ice cutting techniques probably wouldn't be up to snuff because the ice could be so cold it's as hard as rock or even steel. On the other hand, you can melt a cut through the ice pretty trivially with some sort of hot wire or heated blade. Or it might be more efficient to just blow it into fragments with explosives. Heck, for a Mars mission, a laser cutter might not actually be far fetched. Or maybe it would turn out to be more efficient to melt it at the source and pump it into barrels.
In reality, it'll be akin to strip mining.
If it's decided that it's better to locate a base too far from any rich source, then it might very well be like strip mining. Or it might be like repeatedly boring new wells, heating them and pumping out the water. Or there might be some better technique (I've seen some interesting ideas for microwave devices for liberating water from the soil).
The point is, once you're there with the right equipment, it's entirely doable. The debate about water on Mars is pretty much settled at this point. It's there, it's not just theory any more (well, it is technically still theory in the same way that everything is still theory). Anyone still insisting that the obvious water features on Mars are actually Aeolian or caused by CO2 or some other exotic process doesn't have much of a leg to stand on. If it's there, we can collect it and use it.
It's still hard work, and the water will need to be carefully used. Astronauts would need to bathe with small amounts of continuously recycled water and use extremely low or no flush toilets. They wouldn't be able to get away with using the 400 or so liters per day that the average American uses. The critical point is that it is _not_ impossible.
Throwing a flag, bullshit on the field. You see Billy there is a teeny tiny itty bitty problem with SSD that none of the companies will talk about...they shit themselves WITHOUT WARNING.
Now can a HDD shit itself without warning? Yes but frankly since the coming of SMART its pretty damned rare, instead you get what I had last week, with SMART screaming on boot and a sector scan showing sectors failing. Final result? I was able to get more than 95% of the user's data off the failing drive, with the only thing being lost that which was actually on the failed sectors themselves.
Let us compare that to an SSD failure, shall we? Oh look, all your shit is gone, NO WARNING and no chance in hell of saving anything...wow, sucks to be you huh? I'm sure you'll talk about "cloud backups" or some such bullshit, yeah with the data caps? Hope daddy gave you a trust fund because that shit isn't gonna work on your average residential line in the USA, and in a perfect world people would have backups...and I would have a billion dollars and be woken up every morning by my Alyson Hannigan sexbot who blows me while I eat steak in bed...ain't no perfect world Billy.
So until the SSD OEMs can create an SSD that gives you an "Oh shit I'm gonna die soon" warning all it takes is one person they know getting an SSD shit itself scenario before it turns off everybody they know. BTW if you can show me where I can get a 1Tb SSD for $60 I'd be grateful, as my customers (which are Joe and Jane average BTW) are going through data like crap through a goose, those little 64Gb and 128gb SSDs ain't gonna cut it. Have you SEEN the size of files the average camcorder puts out today? Camera? Hell we now have 41MP fricking smartphones dude, where all that data gonna go? Sure as hell ain't going to the cloud, not with TW/Comcrap merging, by the time the corp buyouts are done you'll be lucky if you get 50Gb a month and then ONLY to the shitty websites, gotta pay those dividends and bonuses ya know.
Seriously guys like you REALLY ought to have to work at a mom&pop shop at least one month every 5 years so that the corporate bullshit don't rot your brain. Sure when you have $100K+ storage budgets throwing several tens of thousands on fatty SSDs with RAID ain't no thing but that is about as fucking far from reality in the consumers space, which just FYI curbstomps corp when it comes to market size just FYI, than it is from here to Mars.
But, there are plenty of posts calling McWhorter an idiot, a pinhead, a shithead, etc. and telling her to shut up and that it is her own fault she was hacked.
Well, she did a really stupid thing, but that still doesn't prove her point. You haven't seen many comments glorifying the hacker, either.
The real idiot test is whether she learns from her mistake, or it happens to her again.
Think about it, next time you wonder how on earth someone could come up with a law that is so far away from reality that it hurts. These people are the same the make laws concerning computers, the internet and everything connected to it. Most of the time taken verbatim from sources that have a rather intense interest in certain laws (aka "lobbying groups"), without even having the slightest idea what their laws will entail.
And not just laws about computers. They are making laws on everything from oil to lettuce without understanding them.
Go back a few years when they had a specific case about video games and free speech in 2011. They set up a lab and played the ultra-violent games for a few days, both online and off, to help make a decision.
That's actually kind of impressive.
You mean, like in Kosovo? Wasn't the West's main excuse to steal Kosovo from Serbia that most of the population was of Albanian origin?
As I recall, the excuse was that the Serbs were trying to kill the Albanians (the Albanians were arguably trying the same thing).
Although you are right, that does seem to be the justification Putin is trying to use.