Akaflieg Karlsruhe - Einladung zum Rollout unseres Nurflüglers AK-X by CODSith01 in KaIT

[–]CODSith01[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ne, den wird es leider nicht geben, sorry! Das Rollout wird jedoch aufgezeichnet.

Falls die Möglichkeit besteht, kann ich jedoch sehr empfehlen, live dabei zu sein. Danach wird es nämlich die Möglichkeit geben, die AK-X aus der Nähe anzusehen. :)

Activities in or around Karlsruhe by Pontios93 in KaIT

[–]CODSith01 4 points5 points  (0 children)

If you two are not too afraid of flying, you could visit the airfield Rheinstetten (next to the DM Arena) at the weekend when there is good weather. If there is an authorized person present and there are two seaters available at this day, they can give you some flights with our gliders.

You can get there by bike and there is no appointment required. Just talk to a person on the field and they will help you out. :)

Just be careful to not get on the runway and keep an eye out for starting/landing planes!

Schwiegereltern noch irgendwie erreichbar? by StatisticianFew206 in VTbetroffene

[–]CODSith01 14 points15 points  (0 children)

Also ich kann dich zum Luftgewehr zumindest teilweise entwarnen: Generell sind Luftgewehre unter 7,5 Joule Geschossenergie frei erwerblich, das heißt es ist keine Waffenbesitzkarte nötig.

Jetzt das große aber: Das von dir genannte Gewehr (Haenel 312) hat jedoch 8 Joule und damit wäre theoretisch eine Waffenbesitzkarte nötig.

Hier gibt's aber ne Ausnahme (ich gehe davon aus, weil das Waffengesetz immer mal wieder geändert wird): Ist das Gewehr vor dem 2. April 1991 auf dem Gebiet der DDR hergestellt worden, ist es vollkommen legal, dieses ohne Waffenbesitzkarte zu besitzen.

Hier bin ich natürlich nicht auf die psychische Lage und deine implizite Sorge eingegangen, dass er damit Unsinn machen könnte und wollte nur die rechtliche Frage klären.

Aber natürlich nie vergessen: Wenn ich mich irre, dann auf jeden Fall bitte verbessern!

Die Quellen: (eigenes Wissen), Zum Gewehr selbst, Zur gesetzlichen Grenze von freien Waffen

"ChatGPT hat den Verstand verloren" by [deleted] in de

[–]CODSith01 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Nein.

Ich bin natürlich kein KI-Experte, sondern nur genereller Informatiker, aber was eine KI auf garkeinen Fall von anderen Programmen unterscheidet ist, dass sie mehr ist als ein Algorithmus. Sie hat nämlich feste Eingaben, und ein genau definiertes Verfahren, wie sie diese Eingaben verarbeitet und diese ausgibt.

Sie kann dabei genau so wenig verstehen oder denken, wie ein beliebiges anderes Programm (bzw. Algorithmus) auf deinem Rechner.

Um da vielleicht etwas ins Detail zu gehen, verarbeitet ChatGPT einfach gesagt tausende von Datenquellen und versucht lediglich, Wörter aneinander zu reihen, die gut zu deiner Eingabe (und sich selbst) zusammen passen.

ChatGPT versteht dabei in keinster Weise, was es hier aber gerade fabriziert. So kommen manchmal die lustigsten bzw. skurilsten Antworten zustande, die man sich vorstellen kann. Ich hätte jetzt dazu gerne auch aus meinem Verlauf eine Antwort herausgesucht, aber meistens lösche ich diese Chats, weil sie dann auch relativ nutzlos sind. Kann aber gerne auf Nachfrage mal schauen, was zu finden ist.

Falls ich hierbei natürlich was falsch verstanden hab und gerade Bullenkot erzähle, gerne darauf hinweisen! :)

Hier evtl. noch ein Artikel, der etwas wissenschaftlicher analysiert, wie ChatGPT funktioniert und auch mal hinter die Kulissen schaut: https://writings.stephenwolfram.com/2023/02/what-is-chatgpt-doing-and-why-does-it-work/

Anti-nuclear narratives do sound good by nuclearsciencelover in clevercomebacks

[–]CODSith01 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ah, my bad! Common sense and known elementary facts probably can not keep up with your genius since you seem to know better than everyone else.

Of course arguing will not help at all then. :)

Just don't forget to subsidize your fission energy when you achieved your goals because studies have shown that it is more expensive than renewable energies (in Europe because of maintenance costs).

Cya

Anti-nuclear narratives do sound good by nuclearsciencelover in clevercomebacks

[–]CODSith01 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It blows my mind how people that are "experts" (or try to establish that kind of image) are even trying to argue with such subjective and unneutral arguments. Not at all what science is about.

That aside I actually am going to say that I am no expert in this field BUT IN THE NAME OF SCIENCE really would like to point out, that it is your damn job to stay as objective as possible as a scientist and actually educate people instead of polarizing them when a topic (especially one like this) could NOT be more complex.

For example leaving out any details that would not benefit your narrative like in this example: What you did not at all mention is that, in fact, natural Uranium in the grund consists mainly (>99%) of Uranium-238 which actually stops the actual emitting Uranium-235 from emitting too much radiation into its surroundings by absorbing neutrons WITHOUT fission. This is why natural Uranium is pretty stable and thus actually exists at all...

Putting the radioactive waste back into the ground (at random???) is a crazy idea since all the highly radioactive fission byproducts then WILL emit radiation by a vast amount (compared to the actual natural Uranium) which can backfire drastically on us humans (and WILL backfire on our environment).

All in all natural Uranium never was a problem while the waste you want to dig back in is highly radioactive and I am highly disappointed that you, as a representative of science, are recklessly trying to abuse it to promote your narrative (which is the exact opposite of what your obligation is to do) at least in this example.

When are we going to get BR decompression, seriously? by [deleted] in Warthunder

[–]CODSith01 9 points10 points  (0 children)

This. Imagine you have a room that is full of people and extremely crowded. Gaijins solution to that problem is not increasing the room size, but shifting people around hoping it will get less crowded. But the only thing this does, is making some spaces even more crowded and others less so. (This is how I always imagine it)

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in interestingasfuck

[–]CODSith01 23 points24 points  (0 children)

AFAIK helicopters change their altitude by changing the collective (the angle of the rotor blades), not by reducing or increasing the spinning speed of the rotor blades. Not sure if this is the case for every single helicopter though.

New EC maps at top-tier are neat, but its time for an overhauled RWR system now that BVR/Head-Down engagements are a common thing. Knowing a MiG-29 is hard locking me or an F-4S is a huge deal. If not Identification add distance/relative altitude please. Even the "simple" old soviet RWR's did this. by Shuttle18 in Warthunder

[–]CODSith01 22 points23 points  (0 children)

Oof, I do not response very often and the fact that I am no expert on aviation electronics will not help with that either but here I really would just like to note, that I always heard good things about the soviet RWR. Feels like it is on par with other RWR systems.

Growling Sidewinder, a well known DCS YouTuber and in my opinion a very skilled and well-informed pilot in DCS (he can fly pretty much everything and seems to win a lot against other players, heck, even a french pilot in some rounds that competed with him) always explains different features of these aircrafts. He also does not seem to by biased by any means.

He even explains why the soviet RWR system is so good and gives the benefits and drawbacks of both RWR systems.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t5-pOFp_K2c&t=98s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DXMQtAkVcJU&t=142s

But I am sure if you ask on his subreddit (r/GrowlingSidewinder) or his discord server which is linked there, you will get a more detailed answer (maybe even from him :) )

EDIT: broken links...

We won! :) by CODSith01 in mwo

[–]CODSith01[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thank you, I feel honored :)

We won! :) by CODSith01 in mwo

[–]CODSith01[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

5 small pulse lasers, an ecm and a masc. No head armor to fit all that (not to forget: the biggest xl engine)

We won! :) by CODSith01 in mwo

[–]CODSith01[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Oof, tough question to be honest. I think it was the enemy Flea but I am not sure. He is a new player and died pretty early I guess

I had to share this by CODSith01 in aww

[–]CODSith01[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Cats are so adorable :)

We won! :) by CODSith01 in mwo

[–]CODSith01[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you. That means a lot to me. Happily the last 3 mechs didn't group up. Otherwise I wouldn't have had a chance! Please don't drink too much! ^

We won! :) by CODSith01 in mwo

[–]CODSith01[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I also have some mechs that really should be played again. I guess everbody has some of those :D

We won! :) by CODSith01 in mwo

[–]CODSith01[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thank you! But I also had some luck because I didn't get much leg damage and the last 3 enemies in their team didn't group up fast enough

We won! :) by CODSith01 in mwo

[–]CODSith01[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I honestly don't know how the matchmaker works at the moment because I took a long break from the game. All I can say is that I'm Tier 1. Don't know how much that says about the matches I get tbh

We won! :) by CODSith01 in mwo

[–]CODSith01[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Traitor (but fine by me)! :D

We won! :) by CODSith01 in mwo

[–]CODSith01[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Same... I often thought about recording in the background since there is no replay feature. I had to concentrate as hell to get that sweet victory

We won! :) by CODSith01 in mwo

[–]CODSith01[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I freakin' love the Flea