Stop your whimpering
and take it like a man. Sounds like this guy screwed up and didn't want to admit it, souring work relations. He had 3 years to take the hint and leave of his own accord.
4422 publicly visible posts • joined 19 Mar 2012
If I understand correctly the copper is actually the direct lining of the combustion chamber and throat, so what is happening is probably a bit of engine rich combustion.
What can be done to fix it can involve many things. Among them: Changing fuel/oxidizer mixture ratios, changing the flow balance in the wall to improve cooling in the hotspots, altering wall thickness (either thinner or thicker, depending on what is happening), changing the injector pattern or slightly altering the flow in certain spots.
There is no TEA/TEB being used in the full size Raptor, so it's definitely not the starter system causing the tinge. On top of that the flame starts out yellow and then turns green. It'd be the other way around if it was ignition fluid.
I also doubt it's the camera as different angles show the same discoloration, and I'd find it strange if several cameras with different lenses, at different angles all showed exactly the same sensor saturation issue.
I'm of the opinion that if you're using that many row in an excel sheet you shouldn't be using excel but something more adapt at handling massive data sets and complex math operations on those sets. Something like MatLab ($$$, great documentation and service) or SciLab (Free, open source, but terrible documentation) or something along those lines. Much faster, and allows all kinds of funky stuff that is sometimes hard to pull off in excel.
Isn't what he's arguing for basically the ground rules for responsible disclosure? Keep schtum, report the problem to the company, give them enough time to fix it or at least give you a response and reasoned argument why they need more time or won't fix it. Then if the company is being an arsehat and only AFTER the previously set deadline has expired without action or response do you disclose to put pressure on the company.
I think the professor is being a bit naïeve in his thinking if he's arguing we should wait with disclosing until it's either patched or exploits are out there because the past has shown we won't know of many of the exploits in use until it's far, far too late.
That's a very shitty thing to have happen. Bet your friend had a crap day when he returned.
It's also why you ALWAYS either leave something clearly unfinished or finish it completely. Or at the very least tape the bog lid shut with a very big notice on top that the pipes are not connected.
No wonder the place is infested with the flying rats. Plenty of roosting opportunity and probably plenty of food sources around from people littering. Whomever thought it would be a good idea to mount those aircon units outside the flat like that deserves to live there for the rest of their lives. Only way to solve it now is to put proper boxes around them with steeply sloped tops and all access holes sealed up properly. The only other solution is to shoot the f%^kers, but that tends to get the treehugging crowd riled up and is difficult to do safely in a residential area.
I'm currently (reluctantly) still using WhatsApp because it's the only way I communicate with some relatives, but if Facebook does indeed pulls everything into the Borg that's ending immediately. Screw Facebook. They already know way too much about me. I'm not going to be using FaceBorg Messenger, EVER.
Sounds a bit like a bad batch of resist resulting in poor litho performance. Or possibly something got contaminated with copper. That's a really insiduous contaminant in how it affects the chip. Could work fine for a while until higher temps allow the copper to diffuse somewhere it shouldn't be.
For a disease like AIDS thats not really all that big of a problem. With modern medicine most of those that carry HIV are at least asymptomatic carriers. (And with proper treatment the levels become so low they are not even in danger of passing it on anymore).
"Within a generation we have lost our unmodified seed stock. You can still get them, but not in a large enough quantity to feed our neighbors."
Citation needed.
I call bullshit on this one. Yes Monsanto delivers a scarily large portion of the worlds seed stock, but not all of it is modified (they sell more than one variety) and they don't deliver all of it. There's still a lot of it around. If a large proportion of farmers ever decides to switch back it'll probably be about a year to 2 years before a full switch can be made by all, but it's most certainly NOT out of the question.
Yes, the PNGC did most of the decent and Armstrong took control because of the boulders, but he flew Eagle down to the surface for a very soft landing when the procedure was basically "contact light on = Engine off, drop the rest of the way". I didn't say he took control just to make a soft landing. *pedantic mode off*
From what I can find most landings in the Apollo program happened under control of the guidance system, with the pilot or commander only moving the landing point around a bit by providing input to said guidance sytem. I seem to recall thr decent of Apollo 11 was also happening completely statisfactory under the control of the guidance system, apart from heading for the above mentioned rock filled crater field. I seem to recall Armstrong mentioning that he took manual control when the 1202 alarm went off as he mentioned the LM still responded to control input.
And I should add, the reason the Apollo LM's did the "drop like a brick for the last bit" landing was that the engine bell didn't have sufficient clearance if a stiff landing was made and could get damaged, which might be problematic if it's still providing thrust.
For the Chinese landing it was probably a matter of "crush tube shock absorbers are sufficient and lighter than slowing down under power". If you can survive hitting the surface at (what looks like) about 3 to 5 m/s, then that's a lot of slowing down you don't need to do any other way. And it makes sure you don't bounce. You can absorb all that energy in one go and stay where you plonk down much more assuredly than with a gentle touchdown (especially on a slope, where the vertical axis of the craft suddenly starts differing from vertical).
Finally for comparison, it seems Apollo 15 made the hardest landing of the program. Now compare this video of that landing with the Chinese vide. Keep in mind the Apollo video was shot with a much narrower angle lens from several meters above the surface and the Chinese lander video was filmed with a higher angle and ends up MUCH closer to the lunar surface. I dare say the Chinese pulled off a very smooth landing indeed based on this.
For those interested in LM landing gear design, references:
https://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/LM_Landing%20Gear1973010151.pdf
https://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/tnD6850LMLandingGearSubsytem.pdf
Look at some of the landing videos from other Apollo missions. The LM was designed to shut down it's engine 1.6 meters (a bit over 5 feet) above the surface and just drop the rest of the way. Armstrong however was a bit of a perfectionist and since he was manually controlling the decent anyway (because of the computer problems they were having) he set it down much more gently than some of the other landings. The landing gear incorporated some sizeable shock absorbers. I can't find the data now but I suspect Apollo 11 made (one of the) softest landings in the Apollo program.
To be fair, Mars has about double the gravity, and an atmosphere, making a landing like this much more difficult there. And let's not forget the Curiosity's landing method of lowering the rover from a hovering rocket skycrane. That was pretty damn cool. Lastly, keep in mind Beagle was built to a budget, both financially and in weight terms. Adding propellant to do a mid decent hover adds a lot of weight. Just dropping straight to the surface with airbags and a parachute is just a lot more efficient weight-wise
Or it can go to a jury trial in which members of the public (albeit likely tech-savvy ones since the case is taking place in Silicon Valley)
You guys seriously overestimate the tech-savvyness of the general public. Even those living in a supposedly "high tech" area are not that likely to be super tech savvy. Most people are idiots, independent of location or supposed level of education and intelligence.
So taking very good precautions is a necessity either way. Even if the nations themselves don't do the spying and/or hacking, there's plenty of criminals out there who benefit from doing such (possibly sponsored or at least purposely ignored by whatever nation they are in). And since no security is 100% hack proof, maybe it's better NOT to put everything on the internet...
I don't know what the temperature in hell currently is, but this politician is actually saying things that make sense. Yes he probably has a national interest too, as highlighted above, but it still makes sense.
With these sorts of issues, ALWAYS allow your boss a way to share in the credit. If your boss had been smart (or you explained how to appear smart to him) he'd have gone to his superiors binder in hand, and told them: "I had my underling work out some cost savings ideas, here's what he came up with". That way he gets to share in the credit instead of feeling stupid for not coming up with it himself.
ALWAYS give your boss (undeserved) credit. Just be sure to keep some evidence in hand of how much he ACTUALLY did in case he ever tries to screw you over with it.
For Astronomy it's the Overwhelmingly Large Telescope obviously.
As for particle physicists, TeVer? (As in Tera electron Volt Fever?) Or Luminosity Fever?
I had all of the equations need and often some example sums in my TI-83 graphing calculator when finishing high school. We couldn't be forbidden from using that as it was an allowed aid by official rules :) Barely used it though, as it turned out I usually just did my homework and actually learned stuff. The programming cable paid for itself and some snacks though. Not all students bothered.
And this is why it shouldn't be allowed to represent yourself in criminal court unless you can show you are competent enough to do so. Yes, the guy is an idiot. He probably would have gotten a far lesser sentence had he had a competent lawyer to show mitigating circumstances and prevent him from shooting himself in both feet with a letter like that.
The cold O-rings might have been the direct cause of the shuttle exploding, it wasn't the cause of the accident. The roots of what allowed the accident to happen and the reason the decision to launch was made lie deep within the culture and organisation of NASA at the time. Read the entire accident rapport (and especially Feynmans Appendix F of such) and read between the lines. Yes, many people were aware of the dangers and many were aware of the possible ways in which their "bit" of the shuttle could fail. Nobody really had a good overview of how all these complex systems worked together and how things could cascade. Likewise, foam shedding was never really linked to thermal protection system damage, and thermal protection system damage had never properly been investigated.
NASA tried multiple times to get different shuttle designs worked out but got stonewalled because they "HAD a shuttle". And the STS itself formed a VERY poor basis for further development as it had been painted into a very difficult corner by the demands placed on it by the military (mainly: once around orbits requiring large cross-range capability and thus large wings, high cargo capacity thus requiring a very large oversize cargo-bay, the decision to use "reusable" engines that turned out to be so complex they weren't actually cheaper than just dumping them in the ocean but made the vehicle much heavier and much more complex)