woodman

13 ms·

61.
by woodman 10y ago
I assume you're talking about the safety beams that prevent the door from closing on obstacles. Have you ever had the door go down on command and then halt, without any obstacle in the way? They're very noisy sensors - lots of f
62.
by woodman 10y ago
I'm certainly no expert on the matter, but I'd doubt anyone who said they were. The first thing that comes to mind is that the alt-right is nationalistic and has no problem with some form of collectivism. The far-right, on the o
63.
by woodman 10y ago
> It's not a good way of accurately gauging the political spectrum but I'm not sure I'd say it doesn't work at all. As it fails in such a modest charge, I'm comfortable saying that it doesn't work. The only
64.
by woodman 10y ago
> You wouldn't call the Republicans "right" if they started handing out generous welfare packages to the masses. Like their pre-Obama universal healthcare proposals? The one dimensional political spectrum, with n-right vs
65.
by woodman 10y ago
The role of the elected is to carry out the will of the governed except in cases where it is the will of a tyrannical majority. I think that has been demonstrated to not work, unless your measure of success is counted by generations and no
66.
by woodman 10y ago
> ... that media needs to be under strict control ... Is that really an alt-right position? I lost interest in politics a long time ago, but the last time I heard that sentiment was from the left - calling for the Fairness Doctrine to be
67.
by woodman 10y ago
> ... in game theory when the other side always defects. Consider the conservative position, and what strategy would work for conserving what is important to them. Any sort of compromise is a long term losing strategy, so of course they
68.
by woodman 10y ago
I only saw that a couple of times, in one case we caught the guy - he still had the 9v in his pocket (why he'd keep it I don't know). If you watch their videos you see that they prefer to be much further back than what is practic
69.
by woodman 10y ago
I've never heard of a fuel-air bomb used for demining... APOBS is used a lot, and no matter how clever the mine is - it can't ignore a chain of explosives going off on top of it.
70.
by woodman 10y ago
Nope, insurgents found a way around that a long time ago when convoys started including jammers. Hybrid detonation systems: radio arm the device outside of jamming range, mechanical switch detonated the IED once the vehicle triggers it.
71.
by woodman 10y ago
If the cliff materialized between the time the path was plotted and uploaded to the missile prior to launch, then no. The missile has an internal map, the radar measurements are like mile markers on the highway - used to find your position
72.
by woodman 10y ago
> Where were the tanks? The airplanes? The warships? I don't know about the tanks, but the airplanes and warships were all over the place - they just weren't property of the German military. Germany was building subs in the Ne
73.
by woodman 10y ago
> Will the barriers and walls be left in place or dismantled? I was looking at satellite images of the area my FOB was at in Fallujah - no sign of our presence. We had double stacked hesco all over the place, as well as Texas and Jersey
74.
by woodman 10y ago
In 1931 Germany's rearmament was public knowledge, and oddly enough the Soviets were well aware - because they were the ones training German airforce pilots. That plus the withdrawal from the League of Nations was a pretty big hint.
75.
by woodman 10y ago
> ... threat of being no longer the dominant power... That is pretty obvious, with the silly resumption of strategically useless bomber flights nearly 10 years ago. > Germany went from "no threat" to ... You might have a bet
76.
by woodman 10y ago
> Active radar increases your detectability. An active radar pointed at the ground, so you'd need a pretty extensive detection network. Also, I don't think stealth is much of a concern once the cruise missiles are over the tar
77.
by woodman 10y ago
> ... go back to MAD with a credible deterrent and credible defence. Whether it is technically feasible or not is one thing... It isn't credible if it isn't technically feasible, it is just a waste of money and it looks foolis
78.
by woodman 10y ago
> A system like this ... could theoretically work. Sorry, but no. You know how modern ones skim along terrain? Terrain maps. If you are using terrain maps to navigate, then you don't need GPS - so this system has no hopes of work
79.
by woodman 10y ago
The terrain following guidance in cruise missiles had an accuracy of a few meters in the early 80s. The only place that tech doesn't work is over the ocean... where there aren't any Russian cell towers. http://www.dtic
80.
by woodman 10y ago
This has to be propaganda designed for domestic consumption, because there is no way this would be effective. You know how cell towers are on the ground, and missiles are in the air? Yeah, sky facing directional antennas in the hundreds o
81.
by woodman 10y ago
Good to know. Although it does raise the question of how a line is drawn. I'm imagining a "I smoked pot when I was your age but..." sort of conversation - just infinitely more uncomfortable for everyone involved.
82.
by woodman 10y ago
All those animals were domesticated for very different reasons. I've spent a lot of time with horses, my family had three, and they're great animals - but they don't come anywhere close to dogs when it comes to trust and the
83.
by woodman 10y ago
> There's no rational reason not to use dogs for meat... Yes there is, unless you would make the same argument for having sex with relatives - which philosophers have rationalized against for thousands of years (way before the genet
84.
by woodman 10y ago
> So, kind of like Ayn Rand, which had a known history of blind following entourage? Without any sort of quantification, that is a very hollow argument. All systems of ideas, and originators of such systems, have a history of "blin
85.
by woodman 10y ago
Pretty sure Schrodinger's cat dies regardless of what I think or perceive...
86.
by woodman 10y ago
No, it isn't - it is basic network administration, and it does nothing to advance the state of the art. That is a bad faith interpretation, especially when considered in the context of offensive development. You're putting licen
87.
by woodman 10y ago
Nothing would make me happier than to be able to take your word for it, but I think your definition of "hardening" might be incredibly broad. DoD funding Ada development, SELinux, rainbow series, cyber grand challenge - hardening
88.
by woodman 10y ago
Satellites and undersea cable taps fall to the NRO and the USN, though I'm sure the NSA pays for some of it. That is beside the point though, the issue is exploit to hardening ratio - not exploit to everything-else ratio.
89.
by woodman 10y ago
I'd really love to know how you know this. I can think of a handful of very public DARPA, NIST, USN and NSA programs that are dedicated to hardening (most are little more than academic curiosities, measured in millions) - whereas the
90.
by woodman 10y ago
Thankfully those who shutdown biological weapons development in the DoD didn't follow the same logic. Purely from a strategic perspective: defense costs much more than offense, it doesn't make sense for a superpower to spend more

More ›