|
|
N_tro_P wrote: Then you misunderstand how it works.
Then I was just lucky when I went out flying yesterday? 
N_tro_P wrote: Also, if I spend more than $100 on a toy, I am very glad to hear it protects itself from my stupidity.
Not to such a degree. I see enough of them every week who use their electronics as an excuse not to learn how to fly.
N_tro_P wrote: That is a total fallacy.
No, it's not. For one thing, never trust a software that you have not misprogrammed yourself. Usually the software is not smart enough to react correctly to something unusual. It could, for example, pick up a vibration over the gyro, try to compensate and make the copter almost uncontrollable.
N_tro_P wrote: Why do you assume a programmed system can not fly safely if a motor fails but a hobbyist can???
Because I have already manually landed a helicopter with a failed swashplate servo. The electronics would simply have tried to use the servo to compensate and simply not have gotten it that the servo was frozen. It's a matter of split seconds and either you can save the model or you can't.
N_tro_P wrote: It seems if there was any mechanical failure, this would become totally chaotic but a system could easily detect a motor failure and safely land it.
No. I don't know a single system that would detect anything at all. besides that, depending on the number of motors and their alignment, not all multicopters can recover from a motor failure. In that case you can only try to minimize the damage. To people, to other's property and perhaps even to the model.
N_tro_P wrote: Actually, that is sort of the point of the safety controls. Honestly, it seems like you really don't know much about drones and are just ranting.
Yes, sure. That's it. So you think it's very smart to have a thing of considerable weight and engine power flying around autonomously, blind and without the owner's control? And it's ok that the owners don't care about controlling anything and use these safety features for the big show?
The language is JavaScript. that of Mordor, which I will not utter here
This is Javascript. If you put big wheels and a racing stripe on a golf cart, it's still a f***ing golf cart.
"I don't know, extraterrestrial?"
"You mean like from space?"
"No, from Canada."
If software development were a circus, we would all be the clowns.
|
|
|
|
|
CDP1802 wrote: N_tro_P wrote: Actually, that is sort of the point of the safety controls. Honestly, it seems like you really don't know much about drones and are just ranting.
Yes, sure. That's it. So you think it's very smart to have a thing of considerable weight and engine power flying around autonomously, blind and without the owner's control? And it's ok that the owners don't care about controlling anything and use these safety features for the big show?
Sounds like something a government entity would do.   
When you are dead, you won't even know that you are dead. It's a pain only felt by others.
Same thing when you are stupid.
modified 19-Nov-21 21:01pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Luckily not. Our buerocrats came with the idea that you have to see an instructor, take lessons and then get a license. Up to now they did not get anything like this through yet.
The language is JavaScript. that of Mordor, which I will not utter here
This is Javascript. If you put big wheels and a racing stripe on a golf cart, it's still a f***ing golf cart.
"I don't know, extraterrestrial?"
"You mean like from space?"
"No, from Canada."
If software development were a circus, we would all be the clowns.
|
|
|
|
|
|
N_tro_P wrote: You are hillarious. FYI, I worked in the aerospace industry. You are being quite arrogant and naive. Planes that haul people today can fly themselves, yet you seem to think a toy should behave more erratic
As a janitor or as a door guard? Being a troll certainly just is your hobby.
And please don't complain about being harassed by a troll again, you two would be perfect roommates.
Go climb a tree.
The language is JavaScript. that of Mordor, which I will not utter here
This is Javascript. If you put big wheels and a racing stripe on a golf cart, it's still a f***ing golf cart.
"I don't know, extraterrestrial?"
"You mean like from space?"
"No, from Canada."
If software development were a circus, we would all be the clowns.
|
|
|
|
|
|
And which part of 'f*** off' did you not understand? I must have overlooked the memo where they announced that every self important dickhead can now come and blurp out phrases in such a tone. Just get lost before you succeed in making me angry.
The language is JavaScript. that of Mordor, which I will not utter here
This is Javascript. If you put big wheels and a racing stripe on a golf cart, it's still a f***ing golf cart.
"I don't know, extraterrestrial?"
"You mean like from space?"
"No, from Canada."
If software development were a circus, we would all be the clowns.
modified 6-Jun-17 14:15pm.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Impressive!
Expensive, but impressive!
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
Expensive?
That's only because you're thinking as a private person.
A saved soldier is worth so much more.
I saw one of those once, they are pretty quiet but also quite autonomous.
You don't steer them, you just tell them what you want to see. CDP would be so dissapointed.
|
|
|
|
|
Everything sold to the military is either overpriced, or defective ... I think it's a law of nature. 
overpriced military items - Google Search[^]
But I also suspect corruption and price gouging most of the time. 
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
OriginalGriff wrote: But I also suspect corruption and price gouging most of the time.
Speaking as a person who has worked in that environment, I can verify that claim. I've seen so much government waste. I was on a development team that wrote a very sophisticated piece of software that tracked, identified, and shipped replacement parts for the military using condition based maintenance. Millions was spent and got shelved due to political affiliations.
When you are dead, you won't even know that you are dead. It's a pain only felt by others.
Same thing when you are stupid.
modified 19-Nov-21 21:01pm.
|
|
|
|
|
|
That's why they got that "public" in films... that way anyone saying it happens will be taken as a fool
M.D.V. 
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
I have a feeling the the US has forgotten the concept of a High Low Mix.
You should rather look at what Israel is doing at the moment, they have been at the forefront of drone design for decades.
I read about their concept drone swarms for SEAD purposes.
Several types of drones get air launched from airplanes at a safe(ish) distance where they are specifically designed to take out an S-400 system by simply overwhelming it.
Also rises the question when it stops being a drone and starts being a missile.
|
|
|
|
|
The Israeli Apache Attack Helicopter has a set of small drones that fly with the aircraft as a targeting and firing solution. The U.S. would sell the base model aircraft to them and they would refit the aircraft with the drone system. If the aircraft needs any base refit, the Israeli military will strip the drone system and send the aircraft back.
When you are dead, you won't even know that you are dead. It's a pain only felt by others.
Same thing when you are stupid.
modified 19-Nov-21 21:01pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Did you ever read the small print?
Quote: xkcd.com is best viewed with Netscape Navigator 4.0 or below on a Pentium 3±1 emulated in Javascript on an Apple IIGS at a screen resolution of 1024x1. Please enable your ad blockers, disable high-heat drying, and remove your device from Airplane Mode and set it to Boat Mode. For security reasons, please leave caps lock on while browsing.
So you want to shoot them down, huh? Be careful not to kiss a rotor with a 5-15 kW motor behind it when you are successful.
The language is JavaScript. that of Mordor, which I will not utter here
This is Javascript. If you put big wheels and a racing stripe on a golf cart, it's still a f***ing golf cart.
"I don't know, extraterrestrial?"
"You mean like from space?"
"No, from Canada."
If software development were a circus, we would all be the clowns.
|
|
|
|
|
I signed up recently on codility where programmers can learn writing algorithms and companies are use it to evaluate candidates for position, what i observed is that for normal inputs my solution always passes, but for very large input my code does not returns result within the time bounds they require, i wanted to know from what source we can learn our algorithm writing skills so that they return the result in the acceptable execution time. or what can be the approaches for that?
modified 5-Jun-17 13:47pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Wikipedia (casual browsing is great so you can later recall that something is a solved problem, saving lots of effort that would have gone into reinventing algorithms for it) and Competitive Programming sites that do tutorials, TopCoder is pretty good.
Bottom-up dynamic programming probably deserves additional practice, not because it's that hard (it isn't) but because it's so broadly applicable even to many problems that aren't well-known solved problems. It also unifies a lot of named algorithms that turn out to be nothing more than applications of DP.
Works for me anyway. Some people read actual books, I've only read TAOCP 4A.
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for your valuable feedback, so your recommendation is to read the book and solve problems on topcoder, right?
|
|
|
|
|
Hmmmm,
They are probably looking to sell whatever you create on their website/service.
Terms for companies - Codility[^]
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS
14. We are the owner or licensee of all intellectual property rights ("IP Rights") in the Service and in any material written or published on it. All such rights are reserved.
You must not use any content on the Site for any purpose not permitted by these Terms of Service and you must not copy, modify, re-format, frame, resell or abuse any part of the Service.
You agree to transfer to us all IP Rights in any content (including test cases and source code) you enter into the Service and you are responsible for any claims that arise due to the fact that you use the Service insofar as the claim relates to the Service (or any part of it) infringing any proprietary right (for example copyright). You are responsible for ensuring that you have the rights or permission needed to comply with these Terms of Service.
Any code entered into the Service by you may be stored and used by us in any way for the purpose of assessment, anti-cheating measures, demonstrating to third parties, and analysis.
|
|
|
|
|
Good catch. That really doesn't seem right. Most sites allow you to own the content you created.
|
|
|
|
|
What you are talking about is explained quite well :
Big O Notation
Big O notation uses a function to describe how the algorithm's worst-case performance relates to the problem size as the size grows very large. (This is sometimes called the program's asymptotic performance.)
Rod Stephens, the author, shows example algorithms in relation to how they are affected by problem set size and explains how to talk about them using Big O notation. It's the clearest explanation I've seen of this. You can read more of the sample from the book at the amazon link.
|
|
|
|
|
Was the temp where I was yesterday afternoon. Hot does not to begin to describe it. (44.4C for those less edumacated).
OTOH, I got close to 300 miles from half a tank using cruise control and a reasonable speed on clear freeways. The range was up at 475 miles at 11:17 and the temp was a cool 98F. 
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
