but still pretty cool.
In the video, the aircraft seemed to fly level at an altitude no higher than its wingspan. This would have been in the ground effect flight regime, in which fixed wing aircraft have a bit more lift and less drag than at higher altitudes. Takes less power to fly in ground effect.
I thought this was an interesting take on Bitcoin:
http://ianso.blogspot.com/2013/10/bitcoin-as-law-enforcementnatsec.html
Great trailer, looking forward to the film's release.
And if we would just get rid of that pesky presumption of innocence thing, we'd sure imprison more criminals. That would be a good outcome, purchased at far too high a price.
In this case, the defendant sure looks like he's guilty. Doesn't matter. If the government didn't follow the law, he should walk.
It sucks when we occasionally let defendants go free who are quite obviously guilty, just because somebody screwed up an evidentiary chain of custody, or was too loosey-goosey about getting a confession through enhanced interrogation, or collected evidence illegally, or whatever breach of due process happened because somebody was lazy/corrupt/just plain human. But we have to do it.
When the government charges an individual with a crime, it's a proceeding by an entity of comparatively infinite power against an individual. It's good that the government has to follow rules exactly in this process. This good thing that we have costs a lot from time to time, and it's worth it.
Great link, thank you.
"Why? Nobody else does." - I believe that's accurate and problematic. Hard to make good decisions if costs of alternatives are obfuscated. We need to fix this by looking for realistic energy accounting when we're evaluating any energy source technology.
"It takes a lot of work to turn a breakthrough into a commodity." Agreed. And I'd keep funding NIF under this rationale alone.
OK, I'll admit to temporary curmudgeonly-ness, or however it might be better expressed. Even if it never puts a watt on the grid, I value the physics and engineering we're uncovering in the fusion program. And the money is not much more than a roundoff error in our national budget. If I had to choose between the ACA and NIF, I'd pick the former. If I had to choose between NIF and the salaries of our delegates to Congress...well, I'd fund additional NIF studies to see what happens when we substitute a member of Congress for the hohlraum....
Maybe because it isn't actually significant. "Breakeven", IIRC, is most commonly understood to mean that the fusion reaction put out more energy than was used to initiate it.But if you're going to be commercially honest about the energy accounting, you need to consider all the energy you used - the 'wallplug' efficiency, as most laser folks would say.
But LLL wants to sell this as a milestone because it yielded more energy *than the target absorbed*. Two way different criteria. LLL's milestone, while of academic interest and doubtless an engineering tour de force, provides no encouragement for commercial use of this technology.
I looked at the company's web site. The technology description indicates that the sensor is a coplanar parallel pair of tiny hot wire anemometer elements located very close together. This structure measures the component of air velocity that is across the wire pair, in the wire pair's plane. Three of these sensors, mounted so they're mutually orthogonal (one each in the XY, XZ, and YZ planes) give the full vector field for air velocity. There is another co-located sensor that gives the pressure (intensity). So one small sensor assembly (about the size of a big kitchen match head) gives high accuracy directional information and time series pressure data. This data set contains everything needed to locate and record a sound source.
Posting AC because I moderated.
Single payer is what we need, and is what most other developed nations have made work well, but it's completely impossible to implement in the United States at this time. Obamacare, the ACA, whatever you want to call it, is at least a substantive step in the right direction. Incremental, imperfect progress beats waiting for the perfect solution we won't get to for a couple of decades.
Isn't this practice pretty much de facto "tying", which is illegal under the Sherman Antitrust Act and the Clayton Act? I mean, if the company blocks non-Apple cables, isn't that awfully close to the "mandatory purchase" scenario that those two laws prohibit? Any lawyers care to opine?
aren't a good thing, IMHO. It's commonly a sign of a chronically under-resourced effort and/or poor management. Occasional emergencies happen, sometimes it takes more to push a product out than you'd planned, but if it's happening all the time, it's not good for you or the company or the customers.
Self driving car could be better than humans on bad roads. System could easily note environmental data (temp, RH) as well as differences between its control inputs and what the car actually does (slipping due to snow, rain, ice), and modify its control laws. Unlike humans, it won't get tired, impatient, worried, sleepy, drunk, etc.
Vehicle response vs. control input systems are in use on several modern combat aircraft - battle damage alters the aircraft flight characteristics, the flight system modifies its control laws to compensate. Can allow a human pilot to continue flight under conditions that would otherwise be impossible. Don't see why a similar capability couldn't be in self driving cars.
The first one failed. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UGM-133_Trident_II
"...but the censors crack down heavily on any move to get people physically mobilized to act on such criticism."
"Oderint, dum metuant."
or:
"Let them hate, so long as they fear."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucius_Accius
You may say what you will, but you may never actually do anything about it.
The use of money is all the advantage there is to having money. -- B. Franklin
