"Of course, torpedoes themselves have issues - basically it boils down to: fast, long range, cheap, smart - pick at most three, and "cheap" counts as two." The generally acknowledged "pick any" in engineering is "Cost, Schedule, Performance" within which you pick any two to be as originally desired. Choose three of four though, that's, charming, lol.

"Torpedoes present a tougher problem, and would probably be the most effective weapon against a laser-armed ship, since making a laser that can counter a torpedo is hard. Of course, torpedoes themselves have issues - basically it boils down to: fast, long range, cheap, smart - pick at most three, and "cheap" counts as two." And why do yo make this supposition? There are wavelengths of light that easily penetrate to the depths torpedoes travel at, which isn't very deep, especially in the terminal phase. It's again just a question of energy on target.

We've been frying pigeons since the inception of radar. Nothing new to be concerned about.

I'm going to go ahead and give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you meant sea SKIMMING, not sea SKIPPING. The idea of a weapon bouncing along the surface of the ocean at 0.92 Mach is...well, hilarious. To say nothing of the fact that the Exocet doesn't go that fast.

The radiation produced by the scanners is non-ionizing. RF is non-ionizing. It's not an X-ray, or an MRI, or a CT, all of which use ionizing radiation. So you lose points for that one.

No, that'd be the Thirteenth Floor, thank you VERY MUCH. :D

"Mil-spec" and "radiation hardened" are not hardly the same thing. A typical military system does not used radiation hardened parts - they're unnecessary. However, chips used in military hardware have to go through extensive proofing to ensure that there aren't sneak circuits, single point failures, etc. That costs money and takes a fair amount of time. You also need to understand that those "mil-spec" and "radiation hardened" pieces of hardware are not designed nor manufactured BY the military or the federal government - they're made by commercial entities, and it's those companies that charge "$30,000 for a hammer". It's called the ACQUISITION process for a reason.

I am so SICK of that stereotype. Having been all over Europe in the last two years, there are just as many overweight people there as in the US. Possibly more on a per capita basis from what I saw. And Scotland? Holy crap!

Yeah except that the G1, myTouch, N1, and EVO were/are all made by the same company...

Man, I was starting to get worried. I read through all these posts hoping that someone who works in our field (I work in the same field as leghorn here) would respond with actual information instead of just keyboard jockeying. Thankfully, someone did. Hooray! I have to ask though, are you sure you didn't mean ANSI C95.1? C95.2 is an RF safety signage standard.

I first heard about this over 6 mos ago and still they're talking about it coming soon. Starting to feel like it's never actually going to come out. I mean, release version is only on the 2.6 branch and they're talking the 2.8 branch. Grr! Do want, now!

What effect does the fact that the iPhone has a vastly lower resolution screen play in this accuracy "test"? Seems it would make it easier to be more accurate.

Sorry, but no, it is not the same phone hardware, internally or externally. It is widely understood that the Nexus One is a variant of the HTC Passion/Bravo which is a Qualcomm Snapdragon-based phone. The HERO is the tired MSM7xxx architecture as the Droid Eris and other prior generation HTC phones.

@bleh - That's funny that you mention problems getting the unlock code - I've had no such problems, even in the middle of a contract. Just call them up and ask, and they give it to me. Couldn't be more straightforward unless they were to put it on a card in the box with the phone. Maybe you just have to be more polite?

Well then let's just make them common carriers like UPS, FedEx, DHL, etc. Then if you want the bits right now they can charge you an exorbitant amount of money over and above the standard "ground" rate. You would however lose data integrity as they wouldn't guarantee that all the bits would get to the end user, nor would they guarantee that the state of the bits on arrival is identical to that when they were sent (aka no error checking).