Blazin
Creative Title
- 7,204
- 36,795
Science!! Fucking magnets, how do they work?
- Thread starter Flunklesnarkin_sl
- Start date
-
Guest, it's time once again for the massively important and exciting FoH Asshat Tournament!
Go here and give us your nominations!Who's been the biggest Asshat in the last year? Give us your worst ones!
Tuco
I got Tuco'd!
- 48,279
- 83,811
As someone who has never considered why Greenland isn't a continent it looks like it's your move, Gavinrad.
Blakkheim
Karazhan Raider
- 8,267
- 38,229
The Designer Of The F-15 Explains Just How Stupid The F-35 Is
http://digg.com/video/the-designer-o...id-the-f-35-is
http://digg.com/video/the-designer-o...id-the-f-35-is
Malakriss
Golden Baronet of the Realm
- 12,772
- 12,167
So you are postulating the Lumie-Cybsled Continental Model in which Australia is somehow not considered a continent? What's the ruling on Antarctica in this interesting scientific example of mental genius?
Ambiturner
Ssraeszha Raider
- 16,081
- 19,634
Eomer
Trakanon Raider
- 5,472
- 272
Depends on who you talk to, but Europe is either considered it's own continent, or part of the Eurasian one (or even the Afro-Eurasian one!). Greenland is tiny compared to every other continent, and doesn't even have it's own tectonic plate (which all of the 7 generally recognized continents do). Hence why it's not considered a continent. In any case, there really isn't a hard and fast definition of what a continent is, but that aside, pretty much no one with half a brain thinks that Greenland qualifies.
HP is supposedly working on a computer that should be ready by 2018 capable of doing, "640TBs Of Data In One Billionth Of A Second", uses 80 times less energy and is scale-able to be used from small phones to super servers.
New Type Of Computer Capable Of Calculating 640TBs Of Data In One Billionth Of A Second, Could Revolutionize Computing | IFLScience
New Type Of Computer Capable Of Calculating 640TBs Of Data In One Billionth Of A Second, Could Revolutionize Computing | IFLScience
Lithose
Buzzfeed Editor
- 25,946
- 113,037
So essentially that system is just cutting out RAM due to advances in flash memory, and then connecting said memory to a fiber optic cable, instead of a copper, to deal with the increased access load? If someone knows more, I'd love to hear, I know next to nothing about the actual engineering of computers. I'm interested though because I was at a conference with an IBM rep who was talking about flash replacing the need for Ram/Rom paradigm, but he said it would be another decade or two.
gogusrl
Molten Core Raider
- 1,364
- 108
If everything they say on the wiki page about HP's advancement withmemristorsis true then it's really something. The deciding factor will be as always manufacturing price (I'm still waiting on my crystal dvds that can store 1pb of data for 1.000.000 years).
HP prototyped a crossbar latch memory that can fit 100gigabitsin a square centimeter,[9]and proposed a scalable 3D design (consisting of up to 1000 layers or 1petabitper cm3).[58]In May 2008 HP reported that its device reaches currently about one-tenth the speed of DRAM.[59]The devices' resistance would be read withalternating currentso that the stored value would not be affected.[60]In May 2012 it was reported that access time had been improved to 90 nanoseconds if not faster, approximately one hundred times faster than contemporaneous flash memory, while using one percent as much energy.[61]
Fadaar
That guy
- 11,118
- 12,146
We watched this at work today (F-15E active duty maintenance unit) and had many many laughs. The guy is 100% right on everything he says. Bureaucracy and functionality will never go hand in hand. There's a reason the Navy and Air Force went their separate ways back in the 70's and 80's when the F-4 began to be phased out. Air Force went for the F-15A/C (original A and C models built in the 70's-80's are pure air-to-air), F-16 (multirole), F-15E (primarily air-to-ground multirole, built from 1986 until 2001). Navy went for the F-14 (air-to-air interceptor, phased out as of 2006) and F-18 (like the F-15, comes in single seat air-to-air variants and two seat air-to-ground variants). Pretty much the only good thing Lockheed has done in the last 20 years has been theSniper Advanced Targeting Pod. Probably one of the best systems our jets fly with.
Foggy
Ahn'Qiraj Raider
- 6,370
- 4,978
So are our jets just fucked for the foreseeable future? Or do we actually have a reliable fighter that wasn't made 20+ years ago?
Big Phoenix
Pronouns: zie/zhem/zer
- 46,930
- 100,345
Pretty much. The industrial military complex has completely shit the bed when it comes to putting out hardware. Not a single big ticket defense project in the past 20 years has not been severely delayed and over budget.
BrutulTM
Good, bad, I'm the guy with the gun.
- 14,796
- 2,694
That article is not very well written, but it makes sense that flash would eventually replace the ram/hard drive setup. The reason that it is done that way is because hard drives are too slow and RAM is too small (plus the part where your data all disappears if the chip loses power). At some point, flash or memristors or whatever you want to call it should reach the point where it can store as much data as a hard drive but still be as fast to access data as RAM and you have the best of both worlds.
- 17,000
- 8,014
Fadaar
That guy
- 11,118
- 12,146
It remains to be seen but I'd lean toward yes. I'm so glad I'm done in the AF in September, they're forcing people from my career field (and others, e-mail came out last Friday) to move over to the F-35 since nobody wants to do it voluntarily. They're doing this all the while reducing the Air Force as a whole by 25,000 people. Sense... it makes none. We still have a vast fleet of proven F-16's (over 1000+ in service in the USAF I think), which unfortunately are to be phased out in favor of the F-35. The F-22 first flew back in the mid 90's (went active back in 2007) and it's just now finally getting to the point where it's reliably useable. Unfortunately, the Air Force could only afford to build around 190 of them. Even worse... the smart people in Washington want to get rid of the A-10 fleet entirely, and thanks to the inner workings of how the Department of the Air Force was formed, the Army is not allowed to have fixed wing aircraft. The Army wants our A-10's BADLY, and they aren't allowed to have them. It's a complete waste of a fantastic aircraft that is a soldier's best friend. The F-15E though is slated to stay in service for another 20+ years (I believe right now the airframes are certified through 2035), and it's probably the best all-around platform in the inventory with nothing in sight to replace it. Also much like the F-22, only 235 or so F-15E's were built for the USAF. There are 219 still in service according to Wikipedia, quite a few were lost in the first and second Iraq wars from ground fire plus accidents here and there (F-15E.info: Strike Eagle reference and resources - F-15E.info - Serial Numbers). The main problem with the stealth aircraft compared to conventional ones is their inability to carry a large amount of ordnance. Even the small framed F-16 can carry vastly more bombs than the much larger F-22 (F-22's external dimensions, ie wingspan and overall length, are damn near the same as the F-15). The F-22 can carry weapons on external pylons, but at that point its stealth is completely gone. The US has too much of a boner for stealth and it's going to come back and bite them in the ass at some point.