Re: Wrong headline?
When it comes to republicans, hypocrisy has no limits.
Let's fix it for you: When it comes to politicians, hypocrisy has no limits.
3290 posts • joined 18 Aug 2011
When it comes to republicans, hypocrisy has no limits.
Let's fix it for you: When it comes to politicians, hypocrisy has no limits.
Actually I see an independent investigation into the leaks from the FBI, and many career officers being shown the door with extreme prejudice.
Not if Trump wins.
Was down in Devon recently
I saw one of their last shows above a city. They were flying literally above my house. This was several weeks before Shoreham which resulted in a severe restrictions on all airshows in the UK from there onwards.
Well. No more.
A 9g delta-winged Eurofighter is far from a joke.
In a straight line dashing to intercept the incoming USSR waves of Backfire bombers - definitely. I have no doubts about it.That is what it was made for. This _WAS_ the design brief. AN INTERCEPTOR (with some minimal extra functionality). Everything else is an afterthought. It could not even do ground attack in the first tranche - at all. It is a fighter built for a bygone age and a conflict that never happened.
Its stall speed is ridiculously high and as a result its maneuverability in a dogfight is ridiculously bad.
As a basis for comparison - watch this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yVlmoNtcyhY Can't be arsed to search - I recall coming across a similar airshow demo with F22 too.
Most of the time the Su in that video is flying at a speed at which the Eurofighter will be in pieces on the ground 10 times and it enters flat spins at least 3 times. Flat spin at stall speed is something the Eurofighter cannot recover out of - you need vector thrust. F22 can. Su30 onwards can. F35 (maybe) can. Eurofighter cannot.
So going back to the 9G - yeah, sure. Even at 9G when flying barely above its stall speed its turning radius is several times higher than the turning radius of vector thrust upgraded Su and F22/35. Even Rafale has better turning radius due to lower stall speed.
This is _EXACTLY_ why the RAF flying Eurofighter is having their arse handed to them on a plate every time they fly a line-of-sight engagement. It had its arse handed to them on a plate by Indians, French and in Red Flag by the USA aggressor squadrons flying the ancient by today's standard F16s. Their only hope is that they will shoot an opponent down out-of-line-of-sight with missiles at long range.
Also, the original topic was airshow - that requires aerobatic performance. Compared to an F22 (or even series A F35) or Su30 onwards the Eurofighter will look ridiculously bad. By the way RAF knows it. Otherwise it would have replaced the Hawks for the Red Wings long ago.
This will is the state today. I have some doubts about any displays using frontline aircraft tomorrow.
Eurofighter - maneuverability is a joke
F35 - thrust is a joke. It simply cannot pull quite a few of the maneuvers everybody else can. Maneuverability most likely matches thrust (this is yet to be seen).
F22 - cost prohibitive and USA only
This is a natural side effect of the current tendencies in fighter development (emphasis on stealth and out-of-line-of-sight weapons). They are simply no longer fit for an aerobatic function - you are better off taking a trainer aircraft for the purpose.
The A10 is not something you want to do aerobatics in.
Out of the list only the Alpha Jet is remotely capable of them.
On the Eurofighter aerobatic capability - it sucks bricks sidewize through a thin straw even compared to the Hawk. This is the primary reason to the spectacular defeat of the RAF against the visiting Indian team flying Su-35s. The rules of engagement were within line of sight and within line of sight the Eurofighter is a sitting duck due to abysmal maneuverability so the visitors had a fun turkey shoot.
In fact, out of the "real" fighters the choice is only between SuperHornet and Su-35. Everything else has been crippled by the Stealth Madness or is crap, sorry Eurofighter.
Most adults have a hearing threshold under 16KHz leaving a couple of KHz to squeeze a beacon in.
1. Getting to the city center and trying to find where to park for a business meeting.
2. Fighting rush hour traffic to hit same meeting.
It is the same as going to London. Driving is a theoretical possibility. Until you consider the availability of parking in the area.
Another is to hire students and (paid) interns,
A gang of students (even well paid ones) + 1-2 grey beards have always been more cost effective than sending something to a warm and hot climate.
The problem is that you cannot create a business model out of that and you cannot skim and pocket on the process. There are no junkets, free dinners with old school friends, etc either.
You also have to treat students like humans - accommodate their schedules, goals, etc.
So, what's the fun in that? Also "what is in that for me" for a given CXX value of "me". None. So definitely, outsourcing it goes. Under Consulting guidance.
So your position that it can fill that gap when the Typhoon gets into visual range engagements is wrong.
You are right - I just realized that the vectoring is Block B feature. Not Block-A.
This makes block A is the only Gen-5 fighter with no thrust vectoring which means that it is a s***age all around. Due to stealth and lack of vectoring it will be beaten flat by Gen-3, Gen-4 or thrust vectored Gen-5 once it is in line of sight.
So it is not any better than the Eurofighter in a dogfight either. If not worse - an F22 or 4+ generation Sukhoi will have either one of them for breakfast. So UK will be complementing one fighter that sucks in close engagement with another. I can see the other rationale (Eurofighter still till this day is not really a ground attack craft, while the F35 is supposed to be able to do it). This is however the most ridiculously expensive way of filling this gap.
Thanks for pointing it out.
A is the only one which has > 1 thrust to weight ratio so combined with vector thrust it is not such a bad piece of kit. If and only if it actually works. At least the spec is pallatable.
It will also complement the Eurofighter which is a fine piece of kit until it gets into line-of-sight, then it is a sitting duck.
The "designed to be an interceptor" delta wing geometry of the latter translates to half-a-county turning radius (similar to an old Mig). So modern fighters like the Su30 onwards, F22, F35 block A and even the Rafale which have half of its stall speed and can literally turn on-their-heel in mid air (like the old Harrier) can enjoy a turkey shoot. If the force has both the Eurofighter and block A having said turkey shoot becomes a much more difficult proposition.
Buy British. Simple.
What? Give me an EXAMPLE of one article in the so called "consumer basket" which is End-to-End British.
Even the f*** Fruit and Veg in the supermarket has a FAKE British label. The real label should be "Grown on British land with European fertilizer, worked on using European farm equipment and proudly collected by Eastern European Slave Labour under the control of Eastern European Gangmasters".
That does not sound British to me. Neither does anything I buy on a regular basis. If you have an example to the contrary I would LOVE to hear it. Alternatively - point to what in the above description you can replace by British. Just do not try to sell me the unscientific fiction of a Xenophobic C*nt from Clackton on the Sea picking potatoes in Lancashire. I call bullshit on that.
We wouldn't want the Government to override Parliament and use Royal Prerogative to push domestic legislation, that way lies dictatorship.
And what exactly do you expect from a Prime Minister and Home Secretary which used quotes from the Mein Kampf (appropriated later by Stalin and Putin) and the Law for the Restoration of the Professional Public Service (Nazi Germany, 1934) in their Tory conference speeches.
I have no expectation of anything else but that. It is not a question of will, it is a question of when and I believe the opposite only after the Prime Minister publicly apologizes (preferably under the gate of Auschwitz) for getting carried away in that direction.
All the "count every step" fitness fanatics already got one. They are not that many either.
From now on it is replacement sales only (aka "mature market").
This is exactly why for the time being I build my CCTV out of Raspberries or Bananas using dummy CCTV enclosures off Amazon. If you add one of the ELP camera modules the result is image quality on par or better than most sub-80£ internet of S**t.
Once "live" the enclosures stop being dummy. The bill of materials is about the same.
The other alternative is to keep the Internet of s**t on its own network and put a firewall in front of it. Less fun though.
The Teams layer sits on top of Word, Excel, PowerPoint, SharePoint, OneNote, Planner, Power BI and Delve and sets up a Slack-like interface to drop in data.
Not main selling the point of Slack or its real competitors like the Atlassian XMPP offering. The real point is integration including libraries to integrate to various 3rd party systems. If MSFT has provided yet another closed variant of Windows Messenger they missed the plot.
And? Who will execute sudo apt-get upgrade (or dist-upgrade)? The holy ghost?
The predator look-alike is their first generation drone.
Jet ones are something new.
Whatever it is, there was LOTS of cut-n-pasting involved and quite clearly some of the original Su, LM, Boeing and Saab ideas have been "lost in translation".
It has some (but not a lot) radar signature reduction measures.
Looks ridiculously big though - more in the light bomber category - more in the Su-34 category than something positioned against F35 or Su-PAKFA
Based on the description of the algorithm suspicious looks like anything which sticks out statistically out of the overall mass. This marks my entire family suspicious as we are not going to visit McDonalds or any of the other junk food outlets in the mall. There is further evidence of nefarious thought as the kids have walked past the Barbie and Star Wars parlor and ignored it.
I will probably have to start training them in simulated conformance now.
So, conform, citizen.
Or have a discussion about conformance with Ed 209.
Not even that.
The streamlining of the process of disconnecting the luser and having a "not us govnor, computer did it" excuse for freezing grannies to death in winter.
Linux has had ring buffer capture for ages and it is actually supported by libpcap. That has timestamp-at-capture as well as support for hardware assisted timestamp (the latter - if you have the appropriate hardware). In fact, this exact "feature" has forced me to use raw instead of bpf/pcap on a couple of occasions in the past. Timestamping is an extremely expensive operation - you DO NOT WANT that enabled unless you really, really need it. It costs quite a bit in terms of performance and it also forces lots of cache synchronizations so chasing down race conditions and/or broken locking becomes more difficult.
I do not quite see how this relates to dtrace though - dtrace can trace anything while bpf (or in Linux case to be more exact - lpf) is used to perform matching on a stream (usually packets, though linux also uses the same bytecode generator for security policies, etc).
The 20th century version used to be called smurf.
I "fondly" remember how 1d10tz used to resolve disagreements on IRC by knocking each other out with that. Some academic class B networks used to offer up to 20000 times amplification factors over OC3s. Facing the result in an average ISP was like trying to stop the Niagara falls with basic plumbing tools.
This is just more of the same - what goes around, comes around. We are now back to the point where an average script k1dd10t can knock nearly any service provider off the Internet. This is not new - we were there before in 1997-2000. We were there ~ 5+ years ago at the beginning of DNS amplification attacks. We will be there again later. It is the nature of the beast, pretending that what is happening is something that never happened before is simply disingenuous.
Time to re-read the Snow Crash.
New millennium Californian startup complying with regulatory requirements? Are you f***ing kidding me?
Though shall not use Regulation to prevent disruption through Californication. Such is the gospel of the Valley as prophesied by its holy prophets Uber, Theranos and various lesser followers.
High end Hell laptops are similary linux-unusable. They use Nvidia chipsets in the high end and the recent Hell stock does not have Optimus off button.
If you do not turn off Optimus you cannot use the binary nvidia driver and you are limited to the open source one which has no thermal management. That, surprise, surprise, leads to the laptop getting as hot as its (HELL) name suggests and crashing before you are finished installing an full OS on it.
So Hell is as guilty as Lenovo if not more so. Just guilty in a different way.
Instead it was because his ex-wife used his phone
He never had anything like his ex-wife security clearance. Regardless of the Hillary case, this alone is criminal outright. She should not have used his personal (or congress) equipment for work purposes.
The thing is idiotic at a different level.
Why the F*** were they sharing a laptop, an ipad and a phone? WTF? I do not work with classified info and I still never share work kit with my wife. She has her own, I have my own. She does not touch my work computer, I do not touch hers.
So, now, let's look at this from a security clearance perspective - she, if memory serves me right, had significantly higher clearance than him. Why the f*** was he allowed his grubby mitts anywhere near her computing equipment?
I find it extremely disturbing that el reg did not quote the more interesting bits from the judgement.
Read the graunidad coverage (especially if you can somehow pull up the initial non-updated one).
The verdict is beyond damning:
“The notion that Uber in London is a mosaic of 30,000 small businesses linked by a common ‘platform’ is to our minds faintly ridiculous,” the judges said. “Drivers do not and cannot negotiate with passengers … They are offered and accept trips strictly on Uber’s terms.”
Pity they edited out the Hamlet quote after an update. It is hilarious - commenting on the Uber UK director that : "The lady doth protest too much, methinks"
As for the A-10 launching from a carrier
It passes the stall speed requirement and can fly at the speed + attack angle you have after leaving a Short Takeoff ramp. So it will not have an issue.
Not that this is likely to happen any time soon in the current political climate. Even if ISIS takes half of the world (not likely), the yanks and the Russians will continue to bicker whose hired goons are less murderous today. Same as they do across the middle east at the moment.
For what amounts to replacing a fan, held in place by 3 fixings.
But... But... But... Sir... This is a Canbus driven fan and only a VW servicedroid dolt in possession of VW service software can magic said fan into life. Surely, you do not understand the greatness of the idea of stuffing everything up to and including lightbulbs with active electronics and losing any potential efficiency from replacing a lightbulb by having to have a load resistor added to the circuit. It is such a great design, you should be proud of buying it. CustomerShaftung durch Technik.
VW - no thanks. While I understand the idea of having CAN in a few places like engine, ABS and airbags, but the rest can happily work of a conventional wire harness. In fact, once both manufacturing and runtime (customer) costs are taken into account over the lifetime of the car CANBUS for sh*t like aircon, lights, etc is neither cheaper nor better.
You forgot the server side of collaborative and conference software and the relevant local and remote processing. You definitely cannot do the processing needed for real time conferencing on a bog standard smart TV chipset. You are off (in terms of processing power requirements) by an order of magnitude if not more.
The correct comparison is a high end HD conference suite (which does only a fraction of what this can do) which cost north of 20K and are installed into fixed conference rooms. Definitely not something you can just wheel into a room somewhere, power up and get stuff done.
The problem is - most companies have no clue on how to leverage any of these so they end up as toys in the exec and marketing suites instead of being abused 24x7 by the engineering teams to ensure that there is no such thing as a TimeZone team split.
No, as it applies only to anyone with some form of a relationship with the company.
Frankly, what this guys are doing is the only way to deal with the IoT gang. FDA, FCC, FTC and short their stock for good measure, because your general connected gadget (medical or otherwise) developer neither has the clue nor desire to make it secure.
Is what they are doing "morally right" - not sure. Is it the only thing which will actually make a difference - probably yes.
That's just silly. How would you test for not yet known httpd or OpenSSL vulnerability ?
There is a precedent - you cannot sell a car unless you guarantee that you will accept it for recycling and unless you provide spare parts for X years. While the laws which combine to form these reqs are different in Eu and US the net effect is the same.
In any case, most of the insecure crap is resold with "brand labels" like Belkin, Dlink, etc and those are not going anywhere. In fact, let's hope that this incident contributes towards the reduction of "outsourcing your incompetence and putting a brand label on it".
You are fundamentally wrong.
Tell that to any one of the USA Carrier oligopoly. They will tell you to contact their sales department to mutually benefit from your money as a paying customer.
You can do that argument over, on this size of the pond. That is how the Internet works in Europe. In USA - not so much.
So unless you are a part of the merry oligopoly gang anycast will not help you much. Sure - you have HA and resilience, but not upstream link diversity. So once your links start to be hit by 600G+ you are out of the game there and then.
Short of a nuclear exchange, they would discover, like the Prince of Wales and Repulse, that a battlecruiser group that does not have sufficient air support should never attempt to engage an enemy that does
This is the UK/USA doctrine resulting from WW2. That definitely applied in the days when bombers could dump a torpedo outside AA range and AA hit rate was in the 10% or thereabouts. It also applied in the days when artillery could throw 20 miles or thereabouts so an air carrier could stand outside weapons range and wipe the cruiser group out.
I am not so sure it still applies when attacking a fleet group which has 300km AA missile cover with > 80% kill rate supplemented by short range air-cover and proximity defenses. I am also not sure it applies if the fleet group has 600km "gun" range. Just it happens to be supersonic cruise missiles nowdays. In fact, this is larger stand-off range than the effective range of a carrier wing.
Thankfully, the jury is still out on which doctrine is correct. And you know what - I rather like it like this as convening the jury will be the last day of the civilization as we know it.
However pedantry aside, we could quite happily sink the Russian fleet with an SSN or two
Fair point - these are the only real teeth UK navy has left nowdays.
Quite clearly the Russians are aware of it too - the remainder of the group is several anti-submarine ships and both Peter the Great and Admiral Kulakov carry some Anti-SSN capacity themselves as well. The group which they will join has several more. They are not the Admiral Belgrano by any means - an SSN will have some difficulty getting into torpedo range. This is also the actual role of their "aircraft carrier" too - half of what it carries are ASW helicopters.
Smells like it.
The idea of enforcing a no-fly zone without a UN mandate reminds me of a scene from Shrek: "You and What Army?"
The amount of AA assets Russia has there even without the extra fleet is enough to ensure that nobody tries to go beyond tough talking to the press. It is either that or WW3.
As the Russians show their force by sending their only Aircraft Carrier (and that one more than us
You are repeating the Tabloid press and looking at it from UK/USA perspective. In UK/USA the carrier is the flagship and the main fire power element in a fleet group. Not the case in Russian fleet.
Only the Independent (rather unsurprising considering who owns them) reported correctly:
1. The Russian aircraft carrier a carrier ain't - it is an aircraft carrying cruiser (official designation) and is an ESCORT SHIP in this fleet group.
2. Its wing while not to be frowned at, is only a fraction of its firepower and is in fact predominantly defensive. The real bruising it can give an opposing fleet is from the battery of supersonic anti-ship cruise SS-N-19s it carries (these are nuclear capable too by the way). It takes one of these to get through for a Nimitz class aircraft carrier to say bye bye to launching any planes any time soon (even with a normal HE warhead). More than one will sink it.
3. The aircraft carrier is escorting the real heavy bruiser in that merry gang - a nuclear battlecruiser which has an even bigger battery of SS-N-19s with a possible supplement of more older cruise missiles launched from torpedo tubes, AA capacity equal to all British 45 Destroyers combined and capable of Aegis anti-ICBM duties too. To put it bluntly - it is a bully in the naval playground which can be taken on only by the yanks. The UK presently neither has the offensive capacity to take it out without resorting to "family atomics", nor the defensive capacity to protect a fleet group if that thing launches a full salvo (even if we do not count its escorting aircraft carrier, 2 missile carrying destroyers, etc).
The levitation part - yes, the overall concept, not so much.
Shanghai has ridiculous operating costs - 67% of the operating costs are energy because the train operates on the surface. Musk is quite right to try something a lot of people have observed before him - the incremental cost on top of the mag-lev infra to encase the track and reduce the air pressure will repay itself in operational savings in a couple of years time.
I do not see this carriage attaining anything near the desired speeds though - the aerodynamics of the maglev support are horrible.
No one ever won a war by dying for his country..you win a war by making the other son-of-a-bitch die for HIS country.
Correct. With one major caveat - you need to make sure that you do not make the "other son-of-a-bitch" a martyr poster child whose name will be carried by 10 "sons-of-bitches". Exponential increase in the population hostility to you is not an equation you can win.
This is off topic, but could not resist:
that turned into a four hour exploration of coffee grinding science*, put $100 Zassenhaus Brasilia on wish list
You cannot beat an ancient Turkish Grinder. The one I have is probably a 100+ years old and still works like a charm (when I can be a*** to grind my own). I have tuned it to produce a slightly coarser grind so I can use it in a Bialetti Moka to make "lethal power level" coffee.
Zassenhaus produces an imitation. Not a bad one, but not really anywhere near the real (from before it became an exportable good) original.
Hal, open the pod bay doors.
I am sorry Dave, I am afraid I cannot do that.
Time to go is the wrong time.
The right time is before you buy it.
The toilet paper?
Exposing Hillary for the crime queen
You realize you are exposing yourself as a prima face drama queen? Life is not Apprentice or some talk show.
Hillary is a professional politician in a developed country. This is an extremely dirty job which normal humans with a moral compass cannot stomach. Principles? Truth? We heard about them. She is also not any more crooked or less crooked than let's say David Cameron or Teflon Bertie Ahern. And do not even get me started about Blair.
Her only distinction is that due to a combination of circumstances she has been under some of the most intense spotlight a politician has been subjected to. As a result we see some seriously unsightly stuff. However, if we subject to such scrutiny someone else at her level what we will see will not be any better (if not worse). Sarkozi judicial dealings, Liam Fox buddy advisors or, god forbid, Jack Ryan sex habits - you name it. Normal people do not do politics (except during wars and revolutions after which they are terminated as no longer needed).
The real problem is to let companies pay lower wages to immigrants
That is _NOT_ the problem.
That is irrelevant if the cost to the company is the same or higher.
An outsourcing company bringing in a worker on a temporary visa from somewhere warm and humid can and will pay HIGHER salary (because of an import visa restriction) than the locals and still laugh its arse off all the way to the bank because:
1. It has not paid any pension
2. It has not paid any loss of income or disability insurance.
3. It has not paid into any employee retention schemes such as share purchase or share options.
4. It has not had to provision for salary/career progression
The employee is similarly laughing all the way to the bank as he is likely to be on a stint short enough not to pay our tax rates and pay significantly lower income taxes in his home jurisdiction. In fact, some of them accept a "wink, wink" deal where they are paid higher rates to comply with import terms for a while and then put on leave or lower rate back home to make the math work out. They are still happy as they are employed and get more than they would get otherwise.
So, stop fixating on the damn salary the imports are being paid. As long as you continue fixating on it, the people who really make the money out of the various outsourcing scams will continue laughing their a*** all the way to the bank. The cost to them should be made equivalent if this market is to be made "fair" and I will not believe that there is an intention to make it fair until the work permit or short term visa fees do not start looking like taking into account 1+2+3+4 above.