Only an idiot would think she was suggesting blindly replacing every instance of "very capable" with accomplished. Clearly they are merely suggestions to consider.
239 karma · joined January 16, 2013
angle += time_taken_to_render_previous_frame * speed;
Also I'm going to rant about Arduino for a bit: Yes it's very simple and easy to get started with, but their API documentation is bad, and the IDE is objectively and irreparably awful and has not really improved since it was first released. Making things even worse they don't provide a decent way to integrate it into other IDEs because lots of the build logic is tied up in the IDE.
You're confusing issues even further! To anyone who wants to actually understand this:
Carbon fibre doesn't have a single "strength" value since it is virtually always anisotropic - its strength varies massively depending on which direction you stress it in.
GP is correct in that the carbon fibre weave with the best minimum strength is the 3D woven stuff which is very fancy and difficult to make, and not what this printer makes.
The most common carbon fibre is 2D woven cloth which is laminated together like plywood. It is strong in the directions of the fibres but can very easily delaminate (the layers become unstuck). It's a pretty big problem for things like the Boeing Dreamliner because the delaminations can be under the surface and impossible to see.
CFRP tubes are often made with the fibres all running along the axis of the tube, but it is then extremely weak in the circumferential direction and will tend to split like bamboo.
The gameplay is totally different.
> Snowden exposed what the NSA was doing, and most of it is bad and everybody is glad we found out, but some was good! So he should be hunted down for the rest of his life.
Kernel contributors aren't background-checked so all you need to do is to pay someone to do some legitimate kernel hacking in a sensitive area. Then in one of their commits slip in a backdoor.
"But noooo the many eyes will see the backdoor!" you say.
This is clearly false. If it were true Linux would have no security bugs at all. Since old security bugs continue to be found, it follows that it is possible to have a security bug that goes unnoticed for many years. See also the underhanded C contest.
Hell maybe it has already happened. Who is to say the latest Linux security bug wasn't deliberately introduced by the NSA?
I don't think this is paranoia - it would be fairly easy for the NSA to do, very useful and almost completely deniable. I would do it if I were them. They certainly wouldn't not do it for moral reasons because they've shown they don't really have any.
All Elsevier has to do is hassle people for reviews and run a website. Hardly difficult. They only survive because of the insane network effects of journal publishing.
1. It makes writing UI state machines much simpler since it is declarative. Instead of saying "when this information changes, update the UI", you just say "This bit of UI shows this information" and then it updates it does it automatically.
2. Animation is also much easier (and possible at all).
3. Layout is... myeh it is not so good actually. UI files made it really really simple, but QML has a kind of Android-like overcomplication to it. For example I have no idea how to have two buttons above each other with the same width and have that width the minimum required to fit them both. With the old system I didn't even have to think about that.
4. Javascript was a seriously bad choice. Fortunately you don't write that much of it (and the non-javascript parts of QML are well designed). The biggest problem is that you have to run code to have even the vaguest idea that it will work (probably you misspelt a variable). With C++ if it compiles you at least have some idea that it will work. Also there is a lot of hassle converting between C++ values and javascript objects. Particularly for lists/vectors of things which work very badly and... to be honest does not really work.
5. It does force you to separate your logic and UI - kind of like HTML/CSS. This is a good thing generally.
6. Once you've done the hard C++ work, building the UI is much quicker and less verbose than using the old system. It is also easier to change around.
In generally they are going in the right direction. They just made a huge mistake by choosing javascript. They've ended up writing their own javascript VM too, so I don't know why they didn't take the opportunity to use a sane, strongly typed language.
If you're thinking "But MitM!!!" then don't. The main weakness of this is actually the plausibility of losing your phone, and hence encryption keys. Unless perhaps they are stored on Google/WhisperSystems' servers. If not it would open you up to this weakness: "Hey, ignore the security warning for this text - I got a new phone so the keys changed. Remind me again what our secret terrorist plan is?"
These can be fixed by:
1. Smoothing out the outside a lot. 2. Rotating the "guards" around the wheel by 45 degrees about the axis of the wheel, so the shaft enters at the top or the bottom of the wheel rather than in the middle.
I can make a drawing if that isn't clear.
Plus I haven't come across any low-friction 3D printed materials yet but there's not much you can do about that.
Exceptions are highly repetitive and mathematical objects like gears, CNC art, fasteners and so on.
I don't think this matters much anyway. Firefox is a more than capable browser. Possibly better than Chrome on Android. It's certainly smoother.
Pros
* Probably much cheaper than a traditional helicopter - you don't need any complicated mechanical components like swash plates. * Increased redundancy would be much easier - you can wire up batteries in parallel, and it can no doubt fly with a significant number of broken propellers. The only other component is the microcontroller, which is cheap enough that you could have multiple copies of it. * Looks like you could fly it indoors fairly safely (in large buildings). With minor modifications it could be flown closer to buildings more safely than a traditional helicopter. * Easy to remote control, as already demonstrated in the video! This could make a great medical evacuation helicopter. * Should be virtually maintenance-free. The only thing I can think that you'd need to do is replace the battery.
Cons:
* Undoubtedly has a much shorter flight time than non-electric helicopters. * Lower capacity than (most) traditional helicopters. * Can't autogyro, so running out of fuel is much more serious! * Possibly costs more to run when you consider the cost of replacement batteries. Hard to say for sure.
It's certainly not a worthless design.
Unfortunately there is a lot of hostility to making binary distribution easier on Linux because of the "you should be using shared libraries and why would you ever want to distribute binaries when you can just distribute the source code?" attitude that prevails.
Having said that, GCC did finally add a real option to link statically (i.e. not `-static`) a few years ago. And I believe the linker finally supports symbol versioning.