Driver to drive?

Archimedes' Lever · Dec 19, 2009

On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 19:06:22 -0600, krw <krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

Real encryption is pretty cheap. The only complication anymore is key
management. No matter what you do that's a problem, so might just as
well make the encryption good. Rag heads aren't the only potential
enemy.

Or simply change the key so often that any brute force hackers will
fail to decrypt anything inside any effective time frame.

Archimedes' Lever · Dec 19, 2009

On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 19:16:00 -0600, Jim Yanik <jyanik@abuse.gov> wrote:

"Joel Koltner" <zapwireDASHgroups@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:jbUWm.160145$Td3.153560@en-nntp-01.dc1.easynews.com:

Ah, sorry Eric, I was thinking you meant the packet transport protocol
(what I meant be tempted to call "link layer" but that's probably not
correct) and not the actual "physical" level link. My apologies.

Which is easier for eavesdropping?

DVB-S, certainly, although if they had used AES (ok, probably not
available when it was designed -- maybe 3DES?), they still would
probably have been OK.

---Joel

It's called COTS;
Commercial Off The Shelf.

keeps costs down,cuts development time.

And absolutely not applicable in all situations. There are many
requisites that still require quality assurance beyond that which can be
counted on via COTS utilization.

In fact, most mission critical systems still use many of the military
and government standards and that rules out a lot of COTS components.

Archimedes' Lever · Dec 19, 2009

On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 17:28:04 -0800 (PST), David Schwartz
<davids@webmaster.com> wrote:

Not just that, but equipment that operates in space has to be space-
qualified. Last I checked, the fastest space-qualified CPUs were
comparable to 66MHz Pentiums. And power and heat budgets on a
satellite are tight.

Today's modern CPUs put out less heat per cycle and exhibit less heat
per "MHz" of "operating speed".

The Athlon family and the Cell are perfect examples of more work done
with less heat than a 66MHz Pentium, so I am quite sure that they are
using more advanced CPUs than that.

Link budget is what matters, and is the main argument for wanting a new
constellation of military networking satellites.

I think eventually, they will put up a new string, but right now, we
have bigger (slower) fish to fry, and our frying pans are doing just
fine, albeit showing signs of being taxed.

Eric Jacobsen · Dec 19, 2009

On 12/19/2009 12:24 PM, Archimedes' Lever wrote:

On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 19:04:59 -0600, krw<krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 00:20:47 -0800, Archimedes' Lever
OneBigLever@InfiniteSeries.Org> wrote:

On Thu, 17 Dec 2009 20:05:07 -0600, krw<krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Thu, 17 Dec 2009 17:44:12 -0800 (PST), Mark<makolber@yahoo.com
wrote:

Passing encrypted video over a satellite network built for unencrypted
analog video is not a trivial challenge. As far as I know, there
exists no scheme to do this that has not been broken already. The
problem is that encryption works partly by diffusing information so
that no part of the output looks like any part of the input. The
satellite link is filled with errors and distortion that have to be
contained to retain adequate video quality.

DS
um,, is that why General Instrument was able to do it did it 15 years
ago for HBO?
It can obviously be done. It just requires different, perhaps less
efficient, error correction algorithms which may mean lower S/N
required.
Wrong. It just requires MORE FEC.
AlswasWrong is once again wrong. Surprise everyone!

You're an idiot. Most digital links can handle up to 10 percent bit
error rate before correction coding fails to fix it.

Generally not. Raw BER for BPSK at 0dB is less than 10 percent, and few
codes can operate that far down. Even capacity-approaching codes
generally need input error rates higher than that.

Can you name a code and what code rate would be required to operate with
an input BER of 10e-1? I wouldn't think anyone would use a deep-space
code on a satellite because of bandwidth efficiency issues.

--
Eric Jacobsen
Minister of Algorithms
Abineau Communications
http://www.abineau.com

krw · Dec 19, 2009

On Sat, 19 Dec 2009 11:24:13 -0800, Archimedes' Lever
<OneBigLever@InfiniteSeries.Org> wrote:

On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 19:04:59 -0600, krw <krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 00:20:47 -0800, Archimedes' Lever
OneBigLever@InfiniteSeries.Org> wrote:

On Thu, 17 Dec 2009 20:05:07 -0600, krw <krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Thu, 17 Dec 2009 17:44:12 -0800 (PST), Mark <makolber@yahoo.com
wrote:

Passing encrypted video over a satellite network built for unencrypted
analog video is not a trivial challenge. As far as I know, there
exists no scheme to do this that has not been broken already. The
problem is that encryption works partly by diffusing information so
that no part of the output looks like any part of the input. The
satellite link is filled with errors and distortion that have to be
contained to retain adequate video quality.

DS

um,, is that why General Instrument was able to do it did it 15 years
ago for HBO?

It can obviously be done. It just requires different, perhaps less
efficient, error correction algorithms which may mean lower S/N
required.

Wrong. It just requires MORE FEC.

AlswasWrong is once again wrong. Surprise everyone!

You're an idiot. Most digital links can handle up to 10 percent bit
error rate before correction coding fails to fix it.

And those error bits don't cost anything to send? What a moron you
are, AlwaysWrong. Oh, and I forgot, you're always wrong too.

krw · Dec 19, 2009

On Sat, 19 Dec 2009 11:25:39 -0800, Archimedes' Lever
<OneBigLever@InfiniteSeries.Org> wrote:

On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 19:06:22 -0600, krw <krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

Real encryption is pretty cheap. The only complication anymore is key
management. No matter what you do that's a problem, so might just as
well make the encryption good. Rag heads aren't the only potential
enemy.

Or simply change the key so often that any brute force hackers will
fail to decrypt anything inside any effective time frame.

....and changing keys is free (hint: key management)? I know it's
difficult for you DimBilb but read before replying.

Jim Yanik · Dec 19, 2009

Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@My-Web-Site.com/Snicker>
wrote in news:31upi51l18hmuhtn1mf20lv9fuhef5khc0@4ax.com:

On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 19:12:32 -0600, Jim Yanik <jyanik@abuse.gov
wrote:

Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@My-Web-Site.com/Snicker
wrote in news:l1fni5pg0rp6f64r3mbcb6apmg0to677ue@4ax.com:

On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 11:11:47 -0600, Jim Yanik <jyanik@abuse.gov
wrote:

Jim Thompson
To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@My-Web-Site.com/Snicker> wrote in
news:ch7ni5ptab13kvhcr28uo31qb03l86685d@4ax.com:

On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 09:02:05 -0600, Jim Yanik <jyanik@abuse.gov
wrote:

krw <krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzz> wrote in
news:t6pli5taujnq2pqp7rqh084udrbgfoomhs@4ax.com:

On Thu, 17 Dec 2009 18:05:15 -0800 (PST), Le Chaud Lapin
jaibuduvin@gmail.com> wrote:

On Dec 17, 7:44 pm, Jerry Avins <j...@ieee.org> wrote:
What do you mean "get the encryption right"? I understood that
there was no encryption at all.

I just assumed that, since it is the US military, employing a
drone to do semi-stealth reconnaisance, that a basic requirement
would be that young kids who probably earn < $100/month should
not be able to intercept the stealth video. My bad.

Maybe they should leave it as it is. That way, the terrorists
could put it up on YouTube. Maybe there is a Hollywood show in
it...

Perhaps it was intentional. They can sell electronics to the
terrorists. Who knows what backdoors lurk...

"So You Think You Can Out-Run A Hell-Fire Missile."

"Smile! You're on Candid Camera!"

the US now has a very small Air-Ground Missile in development;it's
called Spike(not the Israeli Spike ATGM),and is 2 ft long,5.3 lb
total and has a 1 lb warhead,electro-optical guidance.It's
intended to take out unarmored/lightly armored vehicles or single
rooms in buildings and not cause a lot of collateral damage.
A soldier can carry three missiles and launcher,and it can also be
carried on the drones.

it's like a small model rocket.

http://defense-update.com/products/s/spike_laser.htm

That's the sort of thing I recommend to stop "hot pursuit"
situations...

http://www.azstarnet.com/sn/hourlyupdate/321871

Stop on an officer's order or we make you stop ;-)

...Jim Thompson

Heck,-I- want a launch rail on MY car.

Anybody have plans for a rail gun ?

...Jim Thompson

Spike is "fire and forget",so it locks on the target's image.
Easier to aim.
but 5 grand a shot,though....
unless you can engineer a really low cost seeker.

I may build a model rocket copy of Spike,I've got an unfinished
airframe of the right size.

Heh,cops would FREAK if they saw a missile on a launch rail on top of
a car! Maybe put a red LED in the nose,people would think it's a
seeker...

GRIN

What would it cost to make a scaled-down TOW missile?

...Jim Thompson

a "model rocket" like an Estes or Aerotech,or a working guided missile?

(the TOW Anti-Tank Guided Missile[ATGM] is wire-guided,trails a pair of
wires that provide guidance to the missile.)

FYI,here's more on the Navy Spike;
http://tinyurl.com/ybn9xt9

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
localnet
dot com

Jim Thompson · Dec 19, 2009

On Sat, 19 Dec 2009 14:46:19 -0600, Jim Yanik <jyanik@abuse.gov>
wrote:

Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@My-Web-Site.com/Snicker
wrote in news:31upi51l18hmuhtn1mf20lv9fuhef5khc0@4ax.com:

On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 19:12:32 -0600, Jim Yanik <jyanik@abuse.gov
wrote:

Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@My-Web-Site.com/Snicker
wrote in news:l1fni5pg0rp6f64r3mbcb6apmg0to677ue@4ax.com:

On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 11:11:47 -0600, Jim Yanik <jyanik@abuse.gov
wrote:

Jim Thompson
To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@My-Web-Site.com/Snicker> wrote in
news:ch7ni5ptab13kvhcr28uo31qb03l86685d@4ax.com:

On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 09:02:05 -0600, Jim Yanik <jyanik@abuse.gov
wrote:

krw <krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzz> wrote in
news:t6pli5taujnq2pqp7rqh084udrbgfoomhs@4ax.com:

On Thu, 17 Dec 2009 18:05:15 -0800 (PST), Le Chaud Lapin
jaibuduvin@gmail.com> wrote:

On Dec 17, 7:44 pm, Jerry Avins <j...@ieee.org> wrote:
What do you mean "get the encryption right"? I understood that
there was no encryption at all.

I just assumed that, since it is the US military, employing a
drone to do semi-stealth reconnaisance, that a basic requirement
would be that young kids who probably earn < $100/month should
not be able to intercept the stealth video. My bad.

Maybe they should leave it as it is. That way, the terrorists
could put it up on YouTube. Maybe there is a Hollywood show in
it...

Perhaps it was intentional. They can sell electronics to the
terrorists. Who knows what backdoors lurk...

"So You Think You Can Out-Run A Hell-Fire Missile."

"Smile! You're on Candid Camera!"

the US now has a very small Air-Ground Missile in development;it's
called Spike(not the Israeli Spike ATGM),and is 2 ft long,5.3 lb
total and has a 1 lb warhead,electro-optical guidance.It's
intended to take out unarmored/lightly armored vehicles or single
rooms in buildings and not cause a lot of collateral damage.
A soldier can carry three missiles and launcher,and it can also be
carried on the drones.

it's like a small model rocket.

http://defense-update.com/products/s/spike_laser.htm

That's the sort of thing I recommend to stop "hot pursuit"
situations...

http://www.azstarnet.com/sn/hourlyupdate/321871

Stop on an officer's order or we make you stop ;-)

...Jim Thompson

Heck,-I- want a launch rail on MY car.

Anybody have plans for a rail gun ?

...Jim Thompson

Spike is "fire and forget",so it locks on the target's image.
Easier to aim.
but 5 grand a shot,though....
unless you can engineer a really low cost seeker.

I may build a model rocket copy of Spike,I've got an unfinished
airframe of the right size.

Heh,cops would FREAK if they saw a missile on a launch rail on top of
a car! Maybe put a red LED in the nose,people would think it's a
seeker...

GRIN

What would it cost to make a scaled-down TOW missile?

...Jim Thompson

a "model rocket" like an Estes or Aerotech,or a working guided missile?

(the TOW Anti-Tank Guided Missile[ATGM] is wire-guided,trails a pair of
wires that provide guidance to the missile.)

I know. I know. _Many_ of my hybrids circuits are in the TOW...
remember it was Hughes _Tucson_.

FYI,here's more on the Navy Spike;
http://tinyurl.com/ybn9xt9

glen herrmannsfeldt · Dec 19, 2009

In comp.dsp Archimedes' Lever <OneBigLever@infiniteseries.org> wrote:
(snip)

Today's modern CPUs put out less heat per cycle

Right units. I believe it is true compared to NMOS processors,
maybe not to early CMOS processors. NMOS uses a pull-up resistor
and dissipates power independent of clocking. CMOS pretty much
only dissipates power when changing state. (Except that newer
technology have significant tunneling currents as devices get smaller.)

and exhibit less heat per "MHz" of "operating speed".

Wrong units. Heat is energy or power times time.
So heat (energy) per cycle or power (energy/time) per
clock frequency (cycles/time). For heat/MHz you have to
multiply by time, which is likely longer for current processors
than older ones. (They run longer!)

-- glen

Bill Sloman · Dec 19, 2009

On Dec 18, 4:10 pm, John Larkin
<jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 00:18:56 -0800 (PST),Bill Sloman

bill.slo...@ieee.org> wrote:
On Dec 17, 12:32 am, John Larkin
jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
On Wed, 16 Dec 2009 14:43:01 -0800 (PST),Bill Sloman

bill.slo...@ieee.org> wrote:
On Dec 16, 3:25 am, John Larkin
jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 12:06:03 -0800 (PST),Bill Sloman

bill.slo...@ieee.org> wrote:
On Dec 14, 10:41 pm, John Larkin
jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
On Fri, 11 Dec 2009 18:38:06 -0800 (PST),Bill Sloman

bill.slo...@ieee.org> wrote:
On Dec 12, 1:24 am, Raveninghorde <raveninghorde@invalid> wrote:
On Fri, 11 Dec 2009 15:53:31 -0800 (PST),Bill Sloman

bill.slo...@ieee.org> wrote:

SNIP

This would be the insult part of your bluster-and-insult contribution.
Your contributions about the scientific status of anthropogenic global
warming is - of course - the bluster, since you seem to collect it all
from denialist web-sites, rather than coming up with original
nonsense.

Sheesh. This is an engineering group. Engineers can't afford to be
sloppy like climate scientists. They can't afford the sort of politics
seen with the CRU/realclimate team.

You don't seem to have worked on any decent-sized projects.

This was a reference to Ravinghorde, not John Larkin.

John Larkin doesn't seem to have the self-control to take the time to
work out the tree structure of a thread in which he feels that he has
been insulted.

Agent lines up things vertically after a lot of indent levels.

But you still managed to ignore the line

"> >> >On Dec 12, 1:24 am, Raveninghorde <raveninghorde@invalid
wrote:"

But this is a discussion group.

Which excuses you from having to think about what you are responding
to?

Pretty much yes. I don't need to be careful about things that don't
matter.

Well, how _about_ you? Tell us about your biggest projects.

I've got only one big project going on at the moment - getting a new
aortic valve. It doesn't call for much creative input on my part, but
does require a certain amount of showing up at the local hospitals and
putting up with stuff, which can be distracting.

As expected; all hat, no horse.

John has a nice little horse in Highland Technology, but he seems to
think that this gives him a license to wear a huge hat of expertise in
a wide variety of unrelated areas.

When he retails denialist nonsense which he gets - directly or
indirectly - from Exon-Mobil funded web-sites, he's riding a little
wooden hobby-horse that really should be confined to the infant play-
room. Denialist propaganda doesn't really belong in the infant
playroom either, but infants do have an excuse for being too ignorant
to distinguish plausible rubbish from scientifically coherent fact.

This is pretty good:

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/geraldwarner/100020279/copenhagen-c...

... a lot more fun to read than your never-changing dronings.

Of course. Comedy - no matter how irresponsible - always is. And the
Daily telegraph is about as irresponsible as they come. Precisely your
kind of newspaper.

--
Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

Bill Sloman · Dec 19, 2009

On Dec 18, 10:00 pm, "JosephKK"<quiettechb...@yahoo.com> wrote:

On Sat, 12 Dec 2009 00:24:38 +0000, Raveninghorde <raveninghorde@invalid> wrote:
On Fri, 11 Dec 2009 15:53:31 -0800 (PST),Bill Sloman
bill.slo...@ieee.org> wrote:

SNIP

This would be the insult part of your bluster-and-insult contribution.
Your contributions about the scientific status of anthropogenic global
warming is - of course - the bluster, since you seem to collect it all
from denialist web-sites, rather than coming up with original
nonsense.

Sheesh. This is an engineering group. Engineers can't afford to be
sloppy like climate scientists. They can't afford the sort of politics
seen with the CRU/realclimate team.

Engineers have to come up with working solutions. There are no excuses
for making mistakes. If you are wrong you fess up and fix it.

This makes good engineers sceptical by nature. If you ain't then you
get caught out in weeks or months when customers scream and production
grinds to a halt and people don't get paid.

On the other hand you claim authority for climate scientists yet they
have no responsibilty for the outcome of their work.

It is not our job to come up with original ideas in climate science,
the scientists get paid for that. Most of us in this group have enough
to do coming up with the original work we do every day.

However we know enough to look at data and see whether it stacks up or
not. Climate science doesn't stack up.

Nice and clean.

Since Ravinghorde's ideas about climate science have the absolutely
clarity that only superficial ignorance can achieve, they are indeed
nice and clean - that they also happen to be wrong, like most nice,
clean, simple solutions, has probably escaped you.

--
Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

Bill Sloman · Dec 19, 2009

On Dec 18, 10:26 pm, "JosephKK"<quiettechb...@yahoo.com> wrote:

On Wed, 16 Dec 2009 00:57:15 +0000, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelati...@removethishotmail.com> wrote:
Bill Slomanwrote:
On Dec 11, 3:04 am, John Larkin wrote:

Science used to rely on experiment.

Newton's astronomical experiments are famous, as are Darwin's
evolutionary experiments.

Physics in particular also relies on repeatable OBSERVATIONS.

Name a single observation that the warmingists can show is even real,
never mind repeatable.

Graham

Kind of difficult when Hansen et al., keep adjusting the data from what
the satellite reported to what they want it to have reported.

Try reading the raw satellite data sometime. And note that the biggest
recent correction to satellite data was made by Roy W Spencer and John
Christy at the University of Alabama at Huntsville, under a certain
amount of external pressure

http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/309/5740/1548

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satellite_temperature_measurements

Roy W Spencer could be seen as having a personal preference for the
data look the way it did before adjustment 5.2

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roy_Spencer_(scientist)

--
Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

Jim Yanik · Dec 19, 2009

Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@My-Web-Site.com/Snicker> wrote
in news:edfqi5tk6b3jj2sh5qrvn3iv4vftvrk8pf@4ax.com:

On Sat, 19 Dec 2009 14:46:19 -0600, Jim Yanik <jyanik@abuse.gov
wrote:

Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@My-Web-Site.com/Snicker
wrote in news:31upi51l18hmuhtn1mf20lv9fuhef5khc0@4ax.com:

On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 19:12:32 -0600, Jim Yanik <jyanik@abuse.gov
wrote:

Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@My-Web-Site.com/Snicker
wrote in news:l1fni5pg0rp6f64r3mbcb6apmg0to677ue@4ax.com:

On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 11:11:47 -0600, Jim Yanik <jyanik@abuse.gov
wrote:

Jim Thompson
To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@My-Web-Site.com/Snicker> wrote in
news:ch7ni5ptab13kvhcr28uo31qb03l86685d@4ax.com:

On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 09:02:05 -0600, Jim Yanik <jyanik@abuse.gov
wrote:

krw <krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzz> wrote in
news:t6pli5taujnq2pqp7rqh084udrbgfoomhs@4ax.com:

On Thu, 17 Dec 2009 18:05:15 -0800 (PST), Le Chaud Lapin
jaibuduvin@gmail.com> wrote:

On Dec 17, 7:44 pm, Jerry Avins <j...@ieee.org> wrote:
What do you mean "get the encryption right"? I understood that
there was no encryption at all.

I just assumed that, since it is the US military, employing a
drone to do semi-stealth reconnaisance, that a basic requirement
would be that young kids who probably earn < $100/month should
not be able to intercept the stealth video. My bad.

Maybe they should leave it as it is. That way, the terrorists
could put it up on YouTube. Maybe there is a Hollywood show in
it...

Perhaps it was intentional. They can sell electronics to the
terrorists. Who knows what backdoors lurk...

"So You Think You Can Out-Run A Hell-Fire Missile."

"Smile! You're on Candid Camera!"

the US now has a very small Air-Ground Missile in development;it's
called Spike(not the Israeli Spike ATGM),and is 2 ft long,5.3 lb
total and has a 1 lb warhead,electro-optical guidance.It's
intended to take out unarmored/lightly armored vehicles or single
rooms in buildings and not cause a lot of collateral damage.
A soldier can carry three missiles and launcher,and it can also be
carried on the drones.

it's like a small model rocket.

http://defense-update.com/products/s/spike_laser.htm

That's the sort of thing I recommend to stop "hot pursuit"
situations...

http://www.azstarnet.com/sn/hourlyupdate/321871

Stop on an officer's order or we make you stop ;-)

...Jim Thompson

Heck,-I- want a launch rail on MY car.

Anybody have plans for a rail gun ?

...Jim Thompson

Spike is "fire and forget",so it locks on the target's image.
Easier to aim.
but 5 grand a shot,though....
unless you can engineer a really low cost seeker.

I may build a model rocket copy of Spike,I've got an unfinished
airframe of the right size.

Heh,cops would FREAK if they saw a missile on a launch rail on top of
a car! Maybe put a red LED in the nose,people would think it's a
seeker...

GRIN

What would it cost to make a scaled-down TOW missile?

...Jim Thompson

a "model rocket" like an Estes or Aerotech,or a working guided missile?

(the TOW Anti-Tank Guided Missile[ATGM] is wire-guided,trails a pair of
wires that provide guidance to the missile.)

I know. I know. _Many_ of my hybrids circuits are in the TOW...
remember it was Hughes _Tucson_.

FYI,here's more on the Navy Spike;
http://tinyurl.com/ybn9xt9

...Jim Thompson

well,you don't want to have wires dragging from your car after you've taken
care of some MFFY driver up ahead. ;-)

that's why Spike is so appropo;
you lock in their image,launch,and Spike does the rest on it's own,you are
free to leave...with no wires trailing.And Spike's small warhead means
little "collateral damage". it actually blows up INSIDE the vehicle.

it's also a FAST little missile.600 MPH in 1.5 sec.

MFFY; "Me First,F-You".

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
localnet
dot com

Jim Thompson · Dec 19, 2009

On Sat, 19 Dec 2009 17:23:13 -0600, Jim Yanik <jyanik@abuse.gov>
wrote:

Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@My-Web-Site.com/Snicker> wrote
in news:edfqi5tk6b3jj2sh5qrvn3iv4vftvrk8pf@4ax.com:

On Sat, 19 Dec 2009 14:46:19 -0600, Jim Yanik <jyanik@abuse.gov
wrote:

Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@My-Web-Site.com/Snicker
wrote in news:31upi51l18hmuhtn1mf20lv9fuhef5khc0@4ax.com:

On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 19:12:32 -0600, Jim Yanik <jyanik@abuse.gov
wrote:

Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@My-Web-Site.com/Snicker
wrote in news:l1fni5pg0rp6f64r3mbcb6apmg0to677ue@4ax.com:

On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 11:11:47 -0600, Jim Yanik <jyanik@abuse.gov
wrote:

Jim Thompson
To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@My-Web-Site.com/Snicker> wrote in
news:ch7ni5ptab13kvhcr28uo31qb03l86685d@4ax.com:

On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 09:02:05 -0600, Jim Yanik <jyanik@abuse.gov
wrote:

krw <krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzz> wrote in
news:t6pli5taujnq2pqp7rqh084udrbgfoomhs@4ax.com:

On Thu, 17 Dec 2009 18:05:15 -0800 (PST), Le Chaud Lapin
jaibuduvin@gmail.com> wrote:

On Dec 17, 7:44 pm, Jerry Avins <j...@ieee.org> wrote:
What do you mean "get the encryption right"? I understood that
there was no encryption at all.

I just assumed that, since it is the US military, employing a
drone to do semi-stealth reconnaisance, that a basic requirement
would be that young kids who probably earn < $100/month should
not be able to intercept the stealth video. My bad.

Maybe they should leave it as it is. That way, the terrorists
could put it up on YouTube. Maybe there is a Hollywood show in
it...

Perhaps it was intentional. They can sell electronics to the
terrorists. Who knows what backdoors lurk...

"So You Think You Can Out-Run A Hell-Fire Missile."

"Smile! You're on Candid Camera!"

the US now has a very small Air-Ground Missile in development;it's
called Spike(not the Israeli Spike ATGM),and is 2 ft long,5.3 lb
total and has a 1 lb warhead,electro-optical guidance.It's
intended to take out unarmored/lightly armored vehicles or single
rooms in buildings and not cause a lot of collateral damage.
A soldier can carry three missiles and launcher,and it can also be
carried on the drones.

it's like a small model rocket.

http://defense-update.com/products/s/spike_laser.htm

That's the sort of thing I recommend to stop "hot pursuit"
situations...

http://www.azstarnet.com/sn/hourlyupdate/321871

Stop on an officer's order or we make you stop ;-)

...Jim Thompson

Heck,-I- want a launch rail on MY car.

Anybody have plans for a rail gun ?

...Jim Thompson

Spike is "fire and forget",so it locks on the target's image.
Easier to aim.
but 5 grand a shot,though....
unless you can engineer a really low cost seeker.

I may build a model rocket copy of Spike,I've got an unfinished
airframe of the right size.

Heh,cops would FREAK if they saw a missile on a launch rail on top of
a car! Maybe put a red LED in the nose,people would think it's a
seeker...

GRIN

What would it cost to make a scaled-down TOW missile?

...Jim Thompson

a "model rocket" like an Estes or Aerotech,or a working guided missile?

(the TOW Anti-Tank Guided Missile[ATGM] is wire-guided,trails a pair of
wires that provide guidance to the missile.)

I know. I know. _Many_ of my hybrids circuits are in the TOW...
remember it was Hughes _Tucson_.

FYI,here's more on the Navy Spike;
http://tinyurl.com/ybn9xt9

...Jim Thompson

well,you don't want to have wires dragging from your car after you've taken
care of some MFFY driver up ahead. ;-)

that's why Spike is so appropo;
you lock in their image,launch,and Spike does the rest on it's own,you are
free to leave...with no wires trailing.And Spike's small warhead means
little "collateral damage". it actually blows up INSIDE the vehicle.
it's also a FAST little missile.600 MPH in 1.5 sec.

MFFY; "Me First,F-You".

Jim Thompson · Dec 19, 2009

On Sat, 19 Dec 2009 16:26:11 -0700, Jim Thompson
<To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@My-Web-Site.com/Snicker> wrote:

On Sat, 19 Dec 2009 17:23:13 -0600, Jim Yanik <jyanik@abuse.gov
wrote:

Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@My-Web-Site.com/Snicker> wrote
in news:edfqi5tk6b3jj2sh5qrvn3iv4vftvrk8pf@4ax.com:

[auto-snip]
I know. I know. _Many_ of my hybrids circuits are in the TOW...
remember it was Hughes _Tucson_.

...Jim Thompson

well,you don't want to have wires dragging from your car after you've taken
care of some MFFY driver up ahead. ;-)

that's why Spike is so appropo;
you lock in their image,launch,and Spike does the rest on it's own,you are
free to leave...with no wires trailing.And Spike's small warhead means
little "collateral damage". it actually blows up INSIDE the vehicle.
it's also a FAST little missile.600 MPH in 1.5 sec.

MFFY; "Me First,F-You".

I have in mind some stationary targets ;-)

...Jim Thompson

Anybody have design details for a small rail gun ?

Bill Sloman · Dec 19, 2009

On Dec 16, 10:17 pm, Raveninghorde <raveninghorde@invalid> wrote:

On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 15:32:13 -0800 (PST),Bill Sloman

bill.slo...@ieee.org> wrote:
On Dec 13, 11:43 am, Raveninghorde <raveninghorde@invalid> wrote:
On Sat, 12 Dec 2009 19:37:46 -0800 (PST),Bill Sloman

bill.slo...@ieee.org> wrote:
On Dec 11, 10:31 pm, Raveninghorde <raveninghorde@invalid> wrote:
On Fri, 11 Dec 2009 12:18:06 -0800, John Larkin

For one example of a trick see:

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/12/08/the-smoking-gun-at-darwin-zero/

This is an entertaining exercise in examining raw data. The author
obviously didn't ask anybody why the Darwin temperature records might
have needed to be adjusted, or why they seemed to be a bit odd in
1941.

Most Australians would have been able to explain why records don't
look too good in 1941.

http://www.cultureandrecreation.gov.au/articles/darwinbombing/

Had the author gone as far as running a Google search on "Darwin 1941"
he would have found this item right at the
top of the list.

Japanese bombs do happen to be a slightly more credible explanation
than the one the author seems to fancy, but they don't happen to
generate anything like the same number of conspiracy theory brownie
points, so he didn't bother to search hard enough to find this
tolerably salient explanation.

Bill, you got me there and it shows my ignorance of the science.
Please explain the temporal mechanics.

There was a war on. Weather observations do tend to get disrupted when
this happens, even before the enemy starts dropping bombs - as
happened on the 14th Feburary 1942

None of this reflects on the contents of the article and the war is a
red herring.

Japanese bombs in 1942 following Pearl Harbor in December 1941 means a
temperature correction is needed before the boming happened. And this
bombing caused: "The temperature dropped over a six year period, from
a high in 1936 to a low in 1941. The station did move in 1941 but
what happened in the previous six years?"

The usual natural variation?

Note the temperature measurment site moved in 1941, before the
bombing, from the bombed Post Office to the airport.

SNIP

Snipping the point that the Australian government had stationed a
bunch of fighters at Darwin airport in January 1941, long before the
Japanese bombed Pearl Harbour - presumably the Air Force wanted their
meteorilogical services at the airport, rather than the post office.

http://cas.awm.gov.au/photograph/100119

but Ravinghorde doesn't like being shown up.

Now the Russians are accusing the Hadley Centre of cherry picking only
the warm stations from Russia.

http://en.rian.ru/papers/20091216/157260660.html

/quote

Climategate has already affected Russia. On Tuesday, the Moscow-based
Institute of Economic Analysis (IEA) issued a report claiming that the
Hadley Center for Climate Change based at the headquarters of the
British Meteorological Office in Exeter (Devon, England) had probably
tampered with Russian-climate data.

The IEA believes that Russian meteorological-station data did not
substantiate the anthropogenic global-warming theory.

Ravinghorde is peddling denialist propaganda again.

http://mediamatters.org/research/200912180026

The IEA is primarily interested in the prospects for Russia's oil
exports, which wouldn't be helped by effective action to reduce the
burning of fossil carbon.

http://www.mnweekly.ru/business/20080117/55303654.html

It's head, Andrey Illarionov

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrey_Illarionov

is apparently a senior fellow at the Cato Institute, as well as being
the head of the IEA

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Cato_Institute

and is likely to have been made aware of the utility of a well-timed
denialist press release.

This isn't the first time that Ravinghorde has pounced on denialist
propaganda from Russia - you'd hope he could learn from experience,
but he doesn't seem to have developed that skill. Kind of ironic for
someone who claims to be a sceptic.

--
Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

Bill Sloman · Dec 20, 2009

On Dec 17, 10:31 pm, Raveninghorde <raveninghorde@invalid> wrote:

On Wed, 16 Dec 2009 15:26:02 -0800 (PST),Bill Sloman

bill.slo...@ieee.org> wrote:
On Dec 16, 11:21 pm, Raveninghorde <raveninghorde@invalid> wrote:
On Wed, 16 Dec 2009 21:51:02 +0000, Raveninghorde

raveninghorde@invalid> wrote:
On Fri, 11 Dec 2009 10:42:49 -0800, Rich Grise <richgr...@example.net
wrote:

On Fri, 11 Dec 2009 10:46:38 +1100, Sylvia Else wrote:
Rich Grise wrote:

--Over 31,000 U.S. scientists deny man-made global warming--

http://www.enterstageright.com/archive/articles/0508/0508gwpetition.htm

Is this a matter that's decided by a majority vote?

If it involves ripping off millions of wage-earners to transfer funds to
the parasite class (which cap & tax does), then absolutely!

In fact, it should be a 2/3 majority or unanimous, which a simple majority
isn't.

Hope This Helps!
Rich

http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2009/12/vast-nexus-of-influence.html

/quotes

Bearing in mind that the issue is based on the central deception that
the life-giving gas carbon dioxide is a "pollutant",

Denialist signature. Carbon dioxide can be lfe-giving and a polluntant
in the same way that thirst-quenching water can drown you.

snipped the rest

Even better (as in worse)

Big UK steel works closed.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/67980....

The Daily Telegraph does see Thatcher's influence as benign, while in
fact she gutted U.K. manufacturing industry, and spent very little on
the kind of infra-structure that might have kept Redcar viable.

The chairman of the IPCC, Pachauri, is as bent as a nine bob note (or
a 90 cent buck). HE is also director general of TERI. He takes EU
research money as director general of TERI and then uses his position
as chairman of the IPCC to defend the alarmism he is paid to research.
He is corrupt.

Not that you can produce any evidence to substantiate this claim.

http://www.hindu.com/2009/05/24/stories/2009052457112000.htm

/quote

The European Union has launched project HighNoon in India to assess
the impact of the retreat of Himalayan glaciers and possible changes
of monsoon on distribution of water resources in north India.

The project also aims at providing recommendations for appropriate and
efficient strategies for adaptation to hydrological extreme events
through a participatory process. The EU has earmarked 3 million (Rs.
19.5 crore) for the three-year project bringing together leading
research institutions in the Netherlands, Britain, Switzerland and
India. The Energy and Resources Institute (TERI) and the IITs Delhi
and Kharagpur are part of the project.

/end quote

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/nov/09/india-pachauri-clim...

/quote

"There is no conclusive scientific evidence to link global warming
with what is happening in the Himalayan glaciers." The minister added
although some glaciers are receding they were doing so at a rate that
was not "historically alarming".

However, Rajendra Pachauri, the chairman of the IPCC, told the
Guardian: "We have a very clear idea of what is happening. I don't
know why the minister is supporting this unsubstantiated research. It
is an extremely arrogant statement."

/end quote

Pachauni wasn't the only expert the Guardian quoted

/quote

Sunita Narain, a member of the Indian prime minister's climate change
council and director of the Centre for Science and Environment, said
"the report would create a lot of confusion".

"The PM's council has just received a comprehensive report which
presents many studies which show clear fragmentation of the glaciers
would lead to faster recession. I am not sure what Jairam (Ramesh) is
doing."

/end quote

It looks to me more like a case of the minister getting the report he
wanted - in the style Dubbya made famous - than any evidence of
corruption in the IPCC (where the money availalbe for corruption is
much more restricted).

--
Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

Bill Sloman · Dec 20, 2009

On Dec 18, 8:08 pm, "JosephKK"<quiettechb...@yahoo.com> wrote:

On Fri, 11 Dec 2009 10:46:38 +1100, Sylvia Else <syl...@not.at.this.address> wrote:
Rich Grise wrote:
Found on rec.crafts.metalworking, not crossposted because we all know what
happens when I do that!
----
On Thu, 10 Dec 2009 09:13:15 -0600, S. Caro wrote:
Cliff wrote:

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5j9MrjlmXzORMlHNvYfE....
[
1,700 UK scientists back climate science (AP) - 3 hours ago

LONDON - Over 1,700 scientists in Britain have signed a statement
defending the evidence for human-made climate change in the wake of
hacked e-mails that emboldened climate skeptics. ....

Yea, but MY scientists are better than YOUR scientists.

--Over 31,000 U.S. scientists deny man-made global warming--

http://www.enterstageright.com/archive/articles/0508/0508gwpetition.htm
----

Cheers!
Rich

Is this a matter that's decided by a majority vote?

Sylvia.

That is what the politicians are trying to make it. Did you not note the lack of scientists
at the Copenhagen meeting?

They weren't needed. The scientific case is closed. Most politicians
are busy working out how to deal with the consequences. There are few
- Dubbya was an example - who are silly enough to think that denial is
a practical strategy, and go to the trouble of bribing or intimidating
denialist opinions from people who actually know better, but
Copenhagen was a rather too high-level for this kind of rubbish to cut
any ice. One report clamed that Saudi delegation was silly enough to
make a few denialist noises, but somebody seems to have pointed out to
them that they were making themselves look foolish.

--
Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

John Larkin · Dec 20, 2009

On Sat, 19 Dec 2009 14:22:45 -0800 (PST), Bill Sloman
<bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote:

On Dec 18, 10:26 pm, "JosephKK"<quiettechb...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Wed, 16 Dec 2009 00:57:15 +0000, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelati...@removethishotmail.com> wrote:
Bill Slomanwrote:
On Dec 11, 3:04 am, John Larkin wrote:

Science used to rely on experiment.

Newton's astronomical experiments are famous, as are Darwin's
evolutionary experiments.

Physics in particular also relies on repeatable OBSERVATIONS.

Name a single observation that the warmingists can show is even real,
never mind repeatable.

Graham

Kind of difficult when Hansen et al., keep adjusting the data from what
the satellite reported to what they want it to have reported.

Try reading the raw satellite data sometime. And note that the biggest
recent correction to satellite data was made by Roy W Spencer and John
Christy at the University of Alabama at Huntsville, under a certain
amount of external pressure

http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/309/5740/1548

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satellite_temperature_measurements

What a mess! People seem to keep trying various corrections until they
get what they want.

John

John Larkin · Dec 20, 2009

On Sat, 19 Dec 2009 15:14:51 -0800 (PST), Bill Sloman
<bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote:

On Dec 18, 8:08 pm, "JosephKK"<quiettechb...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Fri, 11 Dec 2009 10:46:38 +1100, Sylvia Else <syl...@not.at.this.address> wrote:
Rich Grise wrote:
Found on rec.crafts.metalworking, not crossposted because we all know what
happens when I do that!
----
On Thu, 10 Dec 2009 09:13:15 -0600, S. Caro wrote:
Cliff wrote:

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5j9MrjlmXzORMlHNvYfE...
[
1,700 UK scientists back climate science (AP) - 3 hours ago

LONDON - Over 1,700 scientists in Britain have signed a statement
defending the evidence for human-made climate change in the wake of
hacked e-mails that emboldened climate skeptics. ....

Yea, but MY scientists are better than YOUR scientists.

--Over 31,000 U.S. scientists deny man-made global warming--

http://www.enterstageright.com/archive/articles/0508/0508gwpetition.htm
----

Cheers!
Rich

Is this a matter that's decided by a majority vote?

Sylvia.

That is what the politicians are trying to make it. Did you not note the lack of scientists
at the Copenhagen meeting?

They weren't needed. The scientific case is closed. Most politicians
are busy working out how to deal with the consequences. There are few
- Dubbya was an example - who are silly enough to think that denial is
a practical strategy, and go to the trouble of bribing or intimidating
denialist opinions from people who actually know better, but
Copenhagen was a rather too high-level for this kind of rubbish to cut
any ice. One report clamed that Saudi delegation was silly enough to
make a few denialist noises, but somebody seems to have pointed out to
them that they were making themselves look foolish.

Heck, everybody looked foolish. Pelosi and Obama bailed early to beat
the blizzard moving into D.C.

John

Driver to drive?

Archimedes' Lever

Guest

Archimedes' Lever

Guest

Archimedes' Lever

Guest

Eric Jacobsen

Guest

krw

Guest

krw

Guest

Jim Yanik

Guest

Jim Thompson

Guest

glen herrmannsfeldt

Guest

Bill Sloman

Guest

Bill Sloman

Guest

Bill Sloman

Guest

Jim Yanik

Guest

Jim Thompson

Guest

Jim Thompson

Guest

Bill Sloman

Guest

Bill Sloman

Guest

Bill Sloman

Guest

John Larkin

Guest

John Larkin

Guest

Log in

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor