This being Google, how much data does it send back to them?
And if it doesn't will it continue to not send back data in future releases?
That said, curious to see how RL facial recognition matches the stuff in the movies.
16330 publicly visible posts • joined 10 Jun 2009
My study of the British suggests among the Upper Classes it's been "forever"?
While "The Lower Orders" have striven to behave like their "betters" and adopted a similar disdain for knowledge in most forms.
Ever noticed how the British tend to pronounce "intellectual" (with or without the air quotes) with a sneer?
I'm not sure who coined the term "The arrogance of ignorance" but it certainly applies to a significant sector of the "ruling" class.
and let's not forget the bit about "Her majority fell from 4,796 to 346, "
Turning a safe Conservative seat into a marginal is quite a feat, but one she seems to have managed with ease. One might think her constituents had taken a dislike to her. A bit more and she might not be there at all.
The Guardian says “Don’t Leave the Tories Rudd-erless!”
Personally I'd quite happily leave it so.
IIRC the point about a quantum computer is that it computes all answers to a problem EG simulating a universe at the same time.
IOW it's not just the best computer available, it would be the best computer that could ever be available. *
And it's still not powerful enough to handle this problem. :-(
*Keep in mind that what physicists call a computer can just as easily be an analog computer for a specific task, which is how I'd describe a lot of the reports of "quantum computers" I've seen over the years. Great for the class of problems it's built for, but not programmable in the sense of actually writing a program, loading it and running it.
Good rant.
IRL it's $70 million dollars, and it's per seat.
At least part of that's down to the very cautious nature of the NASA Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel (Or ASAP, who's name is deeply ironic given what their "advice" usually does to schedules) who said "Nix" to powered landing for Dragon 2.
At some point it will become apparent that SX (and even Boeing) will launch humans into LEO with capsules they mostly designed themselves while Orion is still years away from first crewed flight.
NASA standard mass for consumables is 5Kg/person/day of air, water and food, of which about 3.5Kg of that is water.
So a vehicle that can take 100 people to Mars on at least a minimum 90day there/90day back trip is carrying 90 tonnes on top.
I'd suggest 30-45 mins flight is not really enough for an in flight meal so you could carry a lot more people. Between 450-900 people say
Now assume a high end ticket to the States is $5000 that's at least $2.75m revenue while the propellant (1100 tonnes) is say $220k-440k max.
So maybe $2m/flight operating profit (if fully booked)?
Across 5-10 locations globally, at least twice a day. ?
According to Bill Gunston this was because the UK industry badly miscalculated the drag on podded engines.
Putting the engines in pods on the wings apparently stops the wings "waggling" about as much and definitely makes them a lot easier to service
And of course putting them next to the fuselage means the cabin is either much noisier or you have to increase sound insulation a lot.
That said the Victor and Vulcan looked stunning aircraft, despite neither being actually supersonic.
Actual railgun launch is around 100 000g acceleration.
As for a carriage well the USN has got that EMALS thing working and that can throw about 27 tonnes of F35 into the air in 45 secs,
An Airbus A380 is about 575 tonnes, or 21x bigger.
To the contrary.
It was the MoD (and it's predecessors) blind faith that the UK needed a "National Champion" that allowed (and in some cases forced) the wholesale merging of the UK military aircraft industry.*
Behold the magnificence that is BAe Systems!
And let us not forget the 23000 men and women of MoD Procurement.
The f**king delusional bu***hit heroic vision of the 1957 Defense Review under the Conservative Defense Minister Duncan Sandys (no aircraft, all missile) also helped put the UK military aircraft industry in the place it is today.
Uber claim "We are not a taxi firm," was BS the day they accepted this was necessary.
The rest is just the Universe catching up.
Once you know they are predatory pricing to drive competition out of the market you know they are monopolists at heart.
They want to be Amazon.
But in the UK they look a hell of a lot like "Stagecoach," or as I like to think of them "Highwayman."
Why am I not surprised?
Yes I think any "deep learning" system should be able to outline its reasoning, or at least something like a regression equation (which is sort of the statistical equivalent of deep learning, where you get an equation that describes the n-dimensional data surface, you just don't know why) would be a start.
At least show what its assumptions are*
*Because everyone know when you have assumptions you make an ass out of "u" and "umption"
Good name.
Let's see how combative she can be.
But remember British chums there are 400+ ISP's in the UK.
Personally I wouldn't trust BT due to Phorn and Stalk Stalk with it's send-every-web-page-touch-to-China "security" sceme. Vermin (Phorn also) or Sky
Incidentally did PlusNet turn to s**t before or after BT bought them?
Good question. Not something I'm planning to spend any money unless it's in the remainder bin (which I anticipate will happen shortly).
Followed up by "Did you do it voluntarily?"
An honest Microsoft book might contain chapters titles like.
"Building the monopoly*" "Keeping the monopoly*" "How we f**ked the USG anti-trust case." "Expect no mercy" and "Everyone is expendable"
* No actual Microsoft monopoly is implied by this statement.
So, maybe make sure you really can restore all that data?
And test it on a regular basis, so you know you can keep on doing it?
Remember, a fully working backup means if it all goes pair shaped you always have another shot at fixing s**t.
And never having to grab ankles and grease cheeks for malware scum.
That allowed me to get a broad shot, then refine down, throwing out the crud.
Now it seems Google think their search so good a single level is all you need.
This is bu***hit.
And they still can't tell the difference between "plasmid" (molecular biology) and "plasmid" (a part of a plasma)
But I can.
In fact the CAMAC standard was designed by people with a clue. It spec's features from board up to "crate" (24 boards, basically 1 level of a whole rack) up to a rack and beyond.
Critically it also includes specs on the power system.
Factoid. The #1 cause of problems on the NASA "Lessons learned"system is about power faults. $Bn space projects delayed or over budget because someone was able to insert a board into a system before it was powered up (massive starting transients), or because the power system was wrongly designed in the first place.
It's old, but it gets the job done.
You don't know much about the history of the WWW, or CERN, do you?
Sounds like some kind of Reinforced Carbon Carbon. Like the nose of the Shuttle (or really high performance brake pads for aircraft).
Might have more in common with ablative heat shields designed for high energy entry, like Jupiter or Venus.
The article said they switched to a Beryllium/tungsten alloy during one of the upgrades.
Which I predict was also a PITA to machine as Be is brittle and highly toxic if airborn.
So, is it "Dr" Cockroach?