Not really a dinosaur - think of the Forbes List as sponsored content; they're just doing what everybody else does, so quite current really.
339 posts • joined 12 Apr 2012
Not really a dinosaur - think of the Forbes List as sponsored content; they're just doing what everybody else does, so quite current really.
"That's the price of fame, you can't just go public on anything that comes up in your head, not in the least because it means you're an inconsiderate, asocial f*ckwit."
I've never got the impression that Linus Torvalds has ever sought fame - in fact, I've got the impression that he doesn't give a fsck about it or, indeed, those people who delight in calling him out about over what he says because he isn't behaving the way that they and you want him to behave. Well tough shit - neither he, nor anyone else, exists purely for your benefit and neither does he or anyone else have to conform to your standards. Stop whinging and get over it.
"So why the rant Reg?"
Gone from 'Biting the hand that feeds IT' to simply 'Stirring the [sh]IT', knowing it'll upset some folk, please others, keeping the the old mill turning.
"I believe (and this info is very difficult to pin down) the forward propulsors are limited in swivelling to +-20 degrees."
I don't know what the vectoring limits are but as the Airlander is designed to operate in (slightly) heavier-than-air mode I'd be very surprised if the fans can't be vectored directly downwards to help compensate for varying loads whilst taking-off and landing. In fact, if you're going to fit vectoring fans on a craft of this type, I'd be a bit surprised if they can't be vectored in any direction, especially directly forwards, to aid braking and positioning.
If you're going to fit vectoring fans I just can't see any good reason for limiting the vector range at all unless the designers only stressed the fan mountings for that +/- 20 deg range, which would seem to be either a bit of an oversight or an indication of marginal performance (in some respect) that could only be addressed by limiting the stress capability of the fan mountings.
If the fans are limited to just +/- 20 deg, I'd be very curious to know exactly why because given the entire context i.e. not just the type and design of the craft, but also its originating customer and intended purpose (military), those limits just don't seem to make much sense.
It doesn't really look like a stall at all - in the longer vid, linked above, the Airlander is already in a nose-down attitude before the final pitch-down. Also, if you full-screen the higher res video in the Reg article, you can see a grounding line hanging below the rear of the control cabin but it doesn't appear to get snagged; it just seems to drop vertically until just before touch-down.
What appears to happen is that the front ducted fans continue to be vectored backwards along the axis of the craft while it's descending, driving it downwards. Then, when it's clear that the attitude is too extreme, the fans start to be vectored downwards but not by nearly enough - they are still largely pointing backwards along the axis and continue driving the craft downwards.
I doubt that the fans are that restricted in their vectoring limits so I suspect that the pilot may not have appreciated just how severe the nose-down attitude was and so just didn't vector the fans enough: Controlled Flight into Terrain.
I'll be interested to read the AAIB report when it's out.
...nothing else to add that isn't bloody well obvious.
...Linux is just the kernel, and wouldn't be anywhere without the rest of the GNU stack to enable it to actually do anything.
And yes, GIT is a Very Good Thing, but I still think I'd vote for the GNU stack as being the biggest contribution to the software world.
Not El Reg's fault, apart from not noticing either, but the 'Boffins pinpoint landslide spot' photo is a bit fscked up - there are two serious problems with this image.
The first, and immediately obvious, problem is that the 'zoomed' area shown in the right-hand half of the image simply doesn't match the indicated area in the full image.
The second problem only becomes apparent when you follow the link to ESA page about this event. At the top of the ESA page is an eight frame .GIF sequence of the outburst where you can clearly see that it occurs on the opposite 'inner face' of the larger lobe, close to where the two lobes join, and not on the 'outer face' surface of the larger lobe, as the 'landslide spot' image would have us believe.
Now the blame for this falls squarely upon the ESA - El Reg simply lifted the landslide spot pic from the ESA web page - but I can't figure out why the ESA would use such a misleading bogus image in the first place.
I'd argue that there are no true democracies, largely due to the Party System.
Although in many countries it's possible to stand as an independent candidate it usually requires a significant up-front deposit and this, in a time where money is being increasingly concentrated in to the hands of a relative few, excludes the majority of 'ordinary' people from trying to stand. When someone does put up the money to stand, most voters, even if they're sympathetic to an independent candidate, will perceive that that independent candidate stands no real chance of winning, and who wants to vote for a loser? The result is that only the main political parties really get a look in and their only purpose is to represent themselves.
The only way we'll ever get true democracy is by doing away with the political party system, but that's never going to happen; we can't get there from here.
"Facebook, Twitter and Google are responsible for terrorist attacks in the West by “consciously failing to combat the use of their sites to promote terrorism and killings.”"
I agree with Baldy50 above; it's a direct result of recent western governmental foreign policies, largely driven by the U.S.A. who need to keep their large standing army ('army' in this case includes naval and air forces) occupied; a large standing army with nothing to do will start to find things to do on its own, at which point they're no longer controlled by their government.
As for "plac[ing] the blame for young Muslims being “radicalised” on those operating social media sites" - this precludes the idea that anyone can actually think for themselves and come to their own conclusions.
"This blame was apportioned despite the committee also acknowledging that witnesses it had summoned agreed “that there does not appear to be any clear template for the factors which might lead to radicalisation.”" - Yes, we take evidence into account (but ignore it if it doesn't suit our current agenda).
"We should utilise the brightest talent of the world’s creative industries..." - more fscking pop-up ads. Hmm... I wonder how the ad-blockers will handle this.
"Vaz also recommended that the press be responsible for promoting “counter-narratives”, and in particular “should refrain from using the term ‘so-called Islamic State’, and should instead refer to ‘Daesh’." - Oh yes, calling people names is both very grown-up and proven to be an effective deterrent.
"“We believe that young people’s lack of ability or awareness of the need to critically challenge their beliefs is also central to the problems we have found,” the committee also reported." - Yes, young people are especially stupid.
Let me make it clear that I do not support terrorism and personally believe that religion is a mental illness (YMMV), but I don't support politicians who treat me like an idiot either.
"Voyager 1 launched on September 5th, 1977, a few days after Voyager 2's August 20th, ascent."
...so a 'few' days is a little over two weeks. Hmm...
I don't think that would go down very well if there are any inhabitants.
"A spacecraft equipped with a camera and various filters could take color images of the planet and infer whether it is green (harboring life as we know it), blue (with water oceans on its surface) or just brown (dry rock),"
Proxima Centauri really only produces red light, so any Chlorophyll is going to look pretty black, and for the same reasons, any oceans won't look blue; it's mostly going to look either red, or red & black (if there's anything, such as Chlorophyll, absorbing any of that red light).
It'll really need spectroscopy to find out anything.
Given the amount of heavy stuff that would need to be transported to Mars, just to start colonisation, I think we'd have to be looking at pretty big spacecraft, being assembled in either Earth or Luna orbit, and which would make a centrifuge plausible for the crew quarters.
The lack of water is not as big a problem as the lack of a Martian magnetosphere, without which hard solar radiation can reach the surface; any colony on Mars would need to live either beneath the surface or inside shielded structures (that same lack of a magnetosphere also means that any project to terraform Mars, to add a breathable atmosphere, would have to be on-going and not a one-time effort).
To establish a colony on Mars we'd first have to send the shielded structures for people to survive in while they assemble the machinery needed to excavate the sub-surface habitats - that's a lot of very heavy stuff that has to be got from Earth to Mars.
Which is not to say that it's not doable, just that it will be very difficult, will take a long time, cost a lot of money and most probably a few lives.
"Will it be POSIX compliant?"
Yup, that will be an important factor. If it is, then a lot of the 'superstructure' that sits on top of existing kernels can be ported but if it isn't then Google are going to have a lot more work to do.
At the same time, and with the resources available to them, it makes some sense for Google to try several different OS schemes for themselves, to prove which ones work and which ones don't.
"But if it's measured by 'falling under gravity' how will the system compensate for the fact that gravity is not a nice constant value?"
It's not measured by falling under gravity, it's just measured whilst falling under gravity.
It's the interference pattern between all of the atoms that is used for measurement and all of those atoms will be influenced to the same degree regardless of the local gravity gradient.
"Even worse vendors continue to publish test reports..."
But what do the better vendors do?
I'd have to disagree that it was the advent of the RPis that advanced Linux development/porting on ARM and instead it was actually the state of Linux on ARM, especially with the advent of armhf, that made the RPis viable.
Debian has been running on ARM since August 2000; the first RPis were released in February 2012.
The Electromagnetic force acts upon charge whilst the Weak Atomic force acts upon Flavour so although the Electromagnetic and Weak forces can be said to be unified the forces still differ in their effect and must still be considered to be different forces.
A rough analogy might be to consider the difference between an aircraft and a conveyor belt, where 'force' is defined as the ability to transport things; put something on an aircraft and it'll go somewhere else, put something on a conveyor belt and it too will go somewhere else. There are considerable differences in the characteristics in those two types of transport though; an aircraft is not a conveyor belt, and visa versa.
In the above analogy, the Electroweak unification is a bit like Fed-Ex, which moves stuff around and which needs both conveyor belts and aircraft to do so; just because Fed-Ex exists doesn't mean that aircraft and conveyor belts no longer exist as different entities because they've been combined into airconveyorcraftbelt objects.
"Going by the push for Surveillance during her tenure at the Home Office, she's not one to let go of an idea."
Yup, because of her enthusiasm for the mass surveillance of the people she is supposed to be serving (Democracy - we've heard of it), my first thought, upon her taking up her new post, was 'Prime Sinister'
"The problem with weight on wheels switches is that they're not that reliable..."
I think you'd be right if the only choice was a mechanical switch but these days it would be trivial to fit multiple induction sensors to each strut - something based on the R.P.M. sensors ubiquitously fitted to all but the very cheapest P.C. cooling fans would do the job pretty well.
"Don't get me started on the stupidity of using a LASER altimeter to judge landing height..."
I think it depends upon how the laser altimeter is implemented. If the system just uses a single laser, in radar mode i.e. just relying upon the timing of returns from a single sensor stream, I can see how it might be degraded in the rain due to scattering and false returns, both from the ground and intervening raindrops. But that's foreseeable, so I'd expect them to use multiple beams in a combined direct/convergence scheme.
Such a scheme would split the initial single beam from the laser generator into five (or more) individual beams that would then be routed along fibre to the 'corners' and 'center' of the aircraft. Each of these sub-beams would then be split into a further sub-pair, with one beam in each sub-pair being used for direct measuring and comparison for consensus voting, whilst the other beam of each sub-pair would be directed to converge with each other, along the lines of the light system used by the Dambusters to ensure that they were at the correct AGL for the bouncing bombs.
Not really rocket science, or terribly expensive to implement.
"Antibiotics were discovered in the 1940s"
Antibiotics were discovered long before the 1940s.
Antibiotics might not have been named as such until 1942 but the discovery probably lies in the very distant past; the ancient Greeks and Egyptians used antibacterial mold and plant extracts to treat infections, albeit without understanding how they worked. On a more scientific footing, synthetic antibiotics were being developed in the late 1880s and even Fleming's 'discovery' of Penicillin was in 1928.
In addition to the ridiculous graphics there's also "Jupiter’s gravitational field nudges the meteors 1.5 million kilometres (930,000 miles) closer to Earth, making them appear brighter and twice as frequently across the sky."
Hmm... The particles of dust etc. shed by comet Swift-Tuttle, from which the Perseids are derived, are in independent orbit around the Sun and are spread out all along that orbit. However, the particles are not tightly packed and closely following each other along that orbit but are spread out to either side of it, interestingly enough (because of the figures quoted by El Reg), over a total width, as it were, of ~0.1 AU, or ~1.5 million km/930000 miles. It is because the width of that stream of particles that we can see them over a period of several days, as it takes that long for the Earth to obliquely pass though the entire stream.
At Jupiter's closest approach to that orbital stream (once again using El Reg's numbers of 257 million kilometres/160 million miles), it will be ~1.7 times further away from the closest particles than Earth is from the Sun. Now whilst Jupiter can certainly perturb the orbit of those closest particles, at that sort of distance, stating that it will move them closer to Earth, when the distance is already effectively 0 for the couple of days it takes Earth to pass through them is just nonsensical.
As for the brightness and frequency, well...
C'mon El Reg, you're just making yourself look stupid.
I was thinking the same thing; rather than safety considerations, the usage restrictions may be due to the lasers using some trick modulation for some of its functionality and the US are trying to maintain some secrecy about it.
The Blue Circle radar was originally developed for the Blackburn Buccaneer and subsequently deployed in development Sea Harriers before being fitted to the development Tornado ADVs.
You shouldn't believe the propaganda put out by any side.
"Of course overflights are pointless"
Overflights reveal changes. Although an overflight may not reveal what a change means, it identifies something that needs further analysis, most probably by less overt techniques.
"using the oldest aircraft available with the lowest tech" & "If you had your brand spanking new recon beauty with all the bells and whistles"
It's a reciprocal agreement that, as the article points out, specifies the equipment that may be used, includes personnel of the overflown state on the flight and the viewing of the data acquired by both the overflown and the overflying states. An overflight wouldn't be allowed if those conditions weren't met, so although you may have better stuff you couldn't use it in this scheme.
"Almost makes you wonder what the Americans use for the job"
Umm... answer's in the article... OC-135Bs
"there's no point in wasting money on the [...] advertising industry."
As advertising can be classed as a business expense it's tax-deductable, so the effective cost to someone wanting to advertise a product is considerably less than the price they pay to the advertising agencies. This is the underlying reason that there's so much advertising.
It also means that advertising is effectively subsidised by the relevant tax-collecting government.
TBH, I can't see many governments complaining about a reduction in unbiased and investigative journalism.
"geostationary orbit around Earth [...] but where isn't known"
Other geo-sync operators will need to know where it is to ensure they don't try to park one of their birds in the same place.
"The exact capabilities of the satellite aren't known"
At that distance, we can be pretty sure that it won't be doing optical, and I'd estimate that location precision for V/UHF will be of the order of several square miles at best. I'd guess that it's intended to capture foreign power military up-link sat-comms from ground units, for traffic analysis and decryption.
"The result if the blame sticks is that the finger pointer gets elected."
Didn't quite work for David Cameron; I remember him blaming the EU and the previous New(tm) Labour incumbents, in roughly equal measure, to deflect blame for the Tory's inability to actually meet any of their 'promises' following their election in 2010 and look where that got him.
And another one for remembering Guy Kewney.
I agree, and can't see the sense in uploading the raw data, but that was the context in which those numbers were quoted.
But why would Intel's CEO say such a thing?
Making such an unprompted and implausible claim tells us something important about the state of things at Intel.
It has the flavour of trying to be reassuring, but then why would Intel feel that they need to reassure unless they feel threatened?
"if you look out into 2020, that average person will generate about 1.5GB a day" and "If you take a look at the average autonomous car in 2020, the estimates right now are it will throw off about 40GB a minute of data"
But these numbers are supposedly in the context of cloud(tm) processing, so...
...we're looking at ~45GB/month uploads, just for social media. For automobiles, we're looking at ~2.4TB/hour, let's say for two hours/day, for 20 days/month, which comes to ~48TB/month of uploads.
Are ISPs going to be able to provide that sort of bandwidth per user at an affordable price within four years?
Curious as to which species of SCSI is being referred to here because I can't recall ever seeing a SCSI cable with male connectors (pins). All of the various SCSI types I've worked with had the pins in the device or on the controller, with the cables carrying sockets.
Design data wouldn't really be of much use to a foreign power but performance & testing data would give them a very good idea of the true capabilities and limitations of these aircraft, telling them what they need to design against in their own aircraft and defence systems; they don't want to be able to copy these aircraft but to beat them.
There's no misunderstanding here; the article refers to products, not component parts.
But in any case, the examples that you and ST give aren't valid; my clothing does not consist of just 'shapes' cut from 'a woven rectangular sheet' (would you not describe weaving as additive? And don't forget the dyes). Until those 'shapes' are combined in an additive process they're still just 'shapes' and won't become a product (clothing, in this case) until they are combined (togas, turbans and the original design of kilt might qualify but I would guess even they require(d) the addition of some stitching along the hems to prevent the weave from unravelling). Similarly, a table leg can't be regarded as a product, unless you're a tablemaker, and furthermore, one who neither varnishes, polishes or otherwise seals their wooden products which, as a result, will then have a very short usable life.
But if we follow the logic that a subtractive phase in the manufacture of a component part qualifies the the end product as being made by subtractive methods then it follows that all products must be the result of harvesting, without which you'd have nothing to process at all, whether it be additive or subtractive (and before anybody wastes time gobbing off about harvesting being subtractive the difference is that in harvesting the product is made from what is subtracted whereas in subtraction the product is the remainder (just to use a deliberately wonky maths allusion)).
ST's response, by starting with a personal deprecation, qualifies itself as simple trolling and so is not worthy of a reply.
"Most products are made from a ["]subtractive["] process"
This is incorrect; most products, at least those that are 'made', as opposed to harvested, such as fruit, vegetables, meat etc, are produced via additive processes. Never seen or even heard of things like automobiles, dish washers, watches, clothes, water wheels, rocking horses, space rockets, cricket bats, [...] being made by subtractive processes. In fact, even most statues that you're likely to see in the context of 'product' will have been made from several parts, shaped in molds, and then joined together.
A quick look around my home revealed just two items that were made by subtractive processes, these being a wood rolling pin and a wood spatula. Everything else was made by additive processes or harvesting.
Soooo... We have a new PM. Judging by past history, we'll soon be involved in a new war*
*Although this one is more like the mid-term Brown appointment, so perhaps not.
"4) Accept that cruise missiles are only marginally faster and more difficult to shoot down than a V1 missile in WW2."
Not true; V1's were ~100 kts slower than current subsonic cruise missiles and couldn't employ indirect routing and very low altitude terrain-following (the V1 was only a 'cruise' missile in the sense that it 'cruised' under continuous power; it was essentially just an unguided missile that could hold a heading and used a timer to bring it down on to its target)
But in any case, new supersonic and hypersonic (and in some examples, stealthy) cruise missiles are currently being developed/tested.
The orbital configuration of this system will be stable if the orbit of the planet is in resonance with the orbit of the two close binary stars. However, if the orbits were not in resonance then this configuration would very quickly come apart.
For this particular arrangement of stars and planet[s] there will be relatively few possible configurations where the orbits are in resonance but many possible configurations where they are not so, whilst resonant configurations, once established, are to a degree, self-aligning, it would still only need a relatively small change in the configuration to break the resonance (this is from the modelling point of view; the authors aren't suggesting that the system may actually become unstable).
This modelling shows that the hypotheses is possible but not probable and only by the sampling of Phobos and Deimos will we be able to tell whether they're captured asteroids or protoplanetary fragments.
Protoplanetary fragments, although superficially looking like asteroids, should show evidence (such as slow melting and compaction) of being part of a larger gravitational body whereas an asteroid, having never been in those gravitational conditions, would not.
Just to add some details to Flocke Kroes's explanation...
When a body is compressed to <= the Shwarzchild radius for the mass of that body it will undergo a runaway gravitational collapse and the current thinking, according to the Quantum Mechanics Standard Model, is that this collapse will continue until it reaches the size of the Planck Length, which is about 1.61 x 10-35 metres. For comparison, the radius of a Proton is about 0.86 x 10-15 metres, so the singularity at the center of a Black Hole is of the order of 1020 times smaller than a Proton.
However, whilst the size of the singularity within a BH is not dependant upon its mass - all singularities collapse to the PL, regardless of mass - there's also the 'Event Horizon', which is in proportion to the mass*; the size of the EH for a body of the same mass as the Earth is about 8.8 mm, and for Sol, about 2.95km.
Now, whilst most people are aware that the EH marks the distance from the singularity where the Escape Velocity is equal to 'c' - the Speed of Light - it also marks the distance from the singularity where Gravitational Time Dilation means that the local rate of time reaches zero, so not only is there the problem of something that's trying to 'leave' a BH being unable to go faster than 'c', it's also got to try to do something (change its state) in a local time period of zero. This would seem to mean that if the state of a body that crosses an EH is to change then it must enter a super-position of states so that, in much the same way as Schrodinger's cat is both simultaneously dead and alive, the body is both simultaneously changed and unchanged.
So forget simplistic descriptions of what BHs are doing; everything that's observable occurs outside an EH; everything, if anything, that goes on within an EH is beyond physics, as far as we currently understand it, except in the most abstract forms.
*<pureSpeculationAlert>The fact that the size of the Event Horizon appears to be dependant upon the mass of the singularity, which is beyond the EH, is interesting; if nothing can escape a BH/EH then why is there still gravity? It would seem that either gravity can pass the EH, even though it's confined by 'c', or perhaps, due to the gravitational time dilation effects, we're actually observing what is essentially a bit of 'frozen' time; the 'real' mass no longer effectively exists in our universe but the historical effects of it do. Who knows? I certainly don't, but when it comes down to it, as far as BHs are concerned, all you've really got to play with is space, time & energy, and they're all candidates to go a bit wobbly beyond an EH</>
"Gnome 3 made it NOT possible to cram 20 icons on the panel, along with 6 system monitor thingies, the date and time, the menu, and some extra white pace between groups of icons arranged *MY* way, not *THEIR* way."
Snap! For precisely those reasons, I ended up with TDE (Trinity Desktop Environment) on all my systems (except for the RPis, which run XFCE). I actually have eight customisable ksysguard monitor thingies on the panel on this particular workstation (CPU load, RAM, network, swap, system load, disk IO, temps & fans). Yeah, I could probably drop the swap space graph, but don't really need to; all the clicky stuff is neatly and compactly grouped together in the rest of the panel to minimise mouse travel. My choice.
As Dark Matter is pretty much defined by the fact that it only interacts with baryonic matter via gravity then it is plausible that it might be detected by LIGO. However, whilst all we know about DM so far has been gained from astronomical observations on very large scales, which means very low-frequency time-period data, LIGO might be able to add to our rather minimal definition of DM by capturing relatively high-frequency time-period data.
"It looks almost like genes making a last-ditch attempt to keep things going"
I agree with SRS that, rather than the genes being activated in an attempt to combat death, they become reactivated because the processes that suppresses their activity ceases; rather than an attempt to keep things going, it is a sign that things are terminally broken.
Hmm... now what does that remind me of?