Re: Mobile as the emergency option?
It sounds reasonable.
It doesn't sound so reasonable when you consider mobile network coverage is only at about 85% in the UK. There's still a lot of places without a signal.
3335 posts • joined 19 May 2010
"Ah Simpkins, come in, stand at ease."
"Thank you sir"
"Now, as you know, I have to prepare a report for the Ministry about these five missing aircraft"
"So can you tell me what happened, exactly?"
"They were brought down by an overwhelming enemy force, sir"
"Really, Simkins? And why didn't the enemy squadron appear on our radar, exactly?"
"Uh, it wasn't exactly a squadron, sir... more of a flock, kind of thing..."
"A Flock, Simkins?"
"Yessir... But they were terrible, sir, mad staring eyes and great sharp beaks and everything, our aircraft didn't stand a chance!"
"I see... Just to clarify then, the enemy force was comprised of what, exactly?"
"Seagulls sir, a great flock of seagulls."
"Thank you Simkins, that will be all."
The registry for .uk, Nominet, for example, has long withheld the personal details of domain registrants and provides only technical information publicly.
This is not true. I've just done a quick blast round some of our company .uk domains and some of my personal .uk domains, and the full registration information is returned by whois.nic.uk.
With the recent investment in Reaction Engines Limited, this may stand a chance of becoming a reality
Hmm, whatever fraction of the £26M that was shared between Boeing and Rolls Royce. Not exactly a massive injection of cash, considering the size of either company, more an expression of polite interest.
like I understand that "Shouldn't of" is becoming common
Ah, now there, we are in complete agreement!
Those who use shouldn't of or couldn't of should be hung, drawn and quartered with a blunt knife. It is an abomination unto Nuggan.
the author is using a turn of phrase they don't really understand.
I rather think the author is using a turn of phrase you don't understand.
From the page you linked to...
The initial meaning of the phrase was to describe something which was partly good but which was ruined by its bad part.
It's now more often used just to describe something that is partly good and partly bad.
With regard to your point about the "Night Mode" Hill shot, In my experience, with a long exposure shot, even on a top-of-the-range SLR or DSLR, you would get the problem of the sky appearing too light, as it reflects back the street lighting.
I would not consider this to be a problem of the specific software, just the limitations of the location.
Radio-controlled aircraft, helicopters, boats etc have been around - and easily available off the shelf - for at least 30 years, and nobody's given a shit.
The task to make one of them able to deliver a terrorist payload is no different to that involved in modifying a quadcopter, and in fact most R/C aircraft have a much better range than your average "drone", so why is it suddenly a problem?
What do you do for email? Run your own server?
Well, as it happens, yes, I do.
But for my Hotmail I use Thunderbird, instead of webmail, so I can download all my mail from that account to a local machine, and then I can back it up on a USB drive as well.
All my important email goes there. I would be screwed if I lost that account.
Issues like this are precisely why I don't trust the cloud.
Sorry, these two statements do not marry up. If you don't trust cloud services why the hell would you trust your important email to a Hotmail account??
doesn't produce any tech relevant to real space travel.
Whilst I agree with your main point, that Branson's primary goal seems to just be about giving rides to rich tourists, I think the principle of an air-launched second stage is one worth pursuing as an alternative to ground to space rocketry, which (with the exception of Reaction Engines) is what everyone else is doing.
It has some of the most iconic music ever written.
Which were all pieces from classical composers. None of it was written for the movie.
Both the Star Wars and Indiana Jones scores were written by John Williams, who unashamedly borrowed themes from Holst, Strauss, Dvorak, and Bach (among others) to create his music.
I'm still waiting for "Rendezvous with Rama" to hit the big screen
Agreed, but unfortunately I don't think the original story has enough sex and violence to appeal to Hollywood, and I shudder to think what an "adaptation" would turn out like.
Probably like I Robot - only the title remains.
This prologue indicated a direction far less trippy than the final version. But 2001 just kept getting longer so the footage was never used and is presumed lost – although based on Kubrick's well-known obsessive cataloguing of research materials, it is sure to be stashed safely somewhere.
It was my understanding that Kubrick explicitly ordered the archive to be destroyed on his death.
I can't remember where I read that, though, unless it was Clarke's book.
I'm going to go out on a limb here but wasn't HAL's behaviour almost supernatural to what humans can understand? i.e. he was under the control of the monolith or in contact with it.
No, that only happened in the sequel 2061, after HAL had been physically destroyed at the end of 2010.
In the original 2001, both book and film, his "psychosis" was due to conflicting instructions in his programming.
The article (and some previous commentards) seem to make no distinction between arteries and veins.
In all but a few extreme cases, it is normal to take blood from, or inject drugs into, a patient's veins, and NOT the arteries. The name sort of gives it away really, it's an Intravenous injection, or IV fluids that are given.
Unless you are doing something clever like blood transfusion or dialysis, you would not deliberately stick a needle in an artery.
Nope they are being tested on London roads, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cfRqNAhAe6c
In case you missed it, that video shows a car which had to have a driver who was fully engaged in watching the road, and twice in the course of the video (10 minutes?) he had to take manual control.
Not very autonomous, is it?
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019