Are the waves smaller than expect, thus harder to detect?
Indeed. They're very small. We're talking about a shift in space the size of a very small fraction of a proton. So yes, with the current detectors they're pretty hard to detect.
That's what they like you to believe. In fact, Republicans stand for the status-quo. i.e., standing for big oil, big gas, big electricity or big (insert your favorite lobbying group here). A new player is bad news for Republican's interests.
Same reason they're against any type of green energy, bytheby
Wasn't something like this portrayed in House of Cards?
Also, would love to see some evidence to the fact, though I have to admit it doesn't sound so farfetched.
1) Not all energy comes from burning fossil fuels. Nuclear, Wind, Solar and Hydro could also be used to power an electric car. That alone should make it comparatively cleaner.
2) As for efficiency goes, in a car about only 15% of the fuel energy is converted into motion. The rest is wasted as heat. Power plants are more efficient at using that heat and turn it into electricity, making again electric cars get more efficiency per unit of fuel burned.
3) Gasoline must be carried to gas stations. Think of it as a hidden energy cost: The cost of running you car = the fuel it burns + the energy it took to get it to your car.
On the opposite side, batteries are not as efficient storing energy as gasoline is, and there is also loss of power on transmission lines. I haven't done the math myself, but overall electric should be more efficient than gasoline cars.
Doing a two minute google search turns out the authors are an undergrad university student (according to LinkedIn) without a research background (google scholar turns empty), and a researcher with a company that develops combustion engines
Not to pull an ad-hominem here, but I'd take the paper with lots of grains of salt.
Make it HAL's voice and I'll switch it right away. Specially if after searching for something it didn't find it, it said. I'm sorry (Your Name), I'm afraid I can't do that.
I thought the same thing, so I roughly parsed the article. It requires at two antennae and needs to know the distance in between those. Basically is doing stereo vision using wifi instead of cameras.
Now I don't know if or how they managed to control each antenna separately, though they do mention they hacked a wifi driver. Also, in their implementation they cite using two devices, not one.
See, setting aside the argument whether it serves its purpose or not, the police is a public entity. They can carry guns not because they want to, but because we let them. We delegate authority under the condition that they will use that authority for the common good and use their weapons to enforce it. We also set up a screening and training program to make sure policemen know how and when to use that force.
However, I never agreed to Mr. John Wayne to play hero with my family sitting around next to him. If he wants a gun to protect his home, that's fine by me. But when I don't trust a stranger's ability to use a gun near myself my loved ones. So yes, I find it appalling the need that some people have to want to play real life Cowboys and Indians.
As for criminals. Well, they're criminals. Of course they'll break the law.
Apple asserts that functional source code in a corporation's commercial product is core protected speech, such that asking it to modify that software on one device—to permit the execution of a lawful warrant—is compelled speech in violation of the First Amendment. This claim "trivializes the freedom protected in Barnette and Wooley"
Before reaching the specifics of Apple’s claim, it is important to start with a threshold observation: the “essential operations” of the American legal system rest upon people sometimes having to say things that they would rather not say—such as when a witness is subpoenaed and sworn to speak the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
I don't know if they're being intentionally thick, but there is a huge difference between telling someone "tell the truth" and "this is exactly what I want you to say". This is very, very dangerous.
This is so down the thread no one's going to read it, but here's my $0.02.
The US only has one good thing going right now for them: the IT and Technology sector. It has no manufacturing (that's all down in China now), and besides Google, Apple is the only big one in the game.
If the FBI forces Apple to give out their source code, this is how is see it playing out:
- Not only the US but the rest of the world loses confidence in Apple products.
- Apple stock drops like a sack of potatoes.
- Apple is forced to downsize: massive layoffs
- Poor sales of Apple products make having the source for iOS irrelevant (no one is using them) and the FBI ends up with its finger up its ass anyway.
Slashdot Mirror
Are the waves smaller than expect, thus harder to detect?
Indeed. They're very small. We're talking about a shift in space the size of a very small fraction of a proton. So yes, with the current detectors they're pretty hard to detect.
That's what they like you to believe. In fact, Republicans stand for the status-quo. i.e., standing for big oil, big gas, big electricity or big (insert your favorite lobbying group here). A new player is bad news for Republican's interests.
Same reason they're against any type of green energy, bytheby
Wasn't something like this portrayed in House of Cards?
Also, would love to see some evidence to the fact, though I have to admit it doesn't sound so farfetched.
So we're basically back on the turtle argument? Man that took a while to come back to.
... you mean this?
One hour?!
Anywhere but in the US spending more than ten minutes waiting to walk through a metal detector is unacceptable.
Ewwwww!
1) Not all energy comes from burning fossil fuels. Nuclear, Wind, Solar and Hydro could also be used to power an electric car. That alone should make it comparatively cleaner.
2) As for efficiency goes, in a car about only 15% of the fuel energy is converted into motion. The rest is wasted as heat. Power plants are more efficient at using that heat and turn it into electricity, making again electric cars get more efficiency per unit of fuel burned.
3) Gasoline must be carried to gas stations. Think of it as a hidden energy cost: The cost of running you car = the fuel it burns + the energy it took to get it to your car.
On the opposite side, batteries are not as efficient storing energy as gasoline is, and there is also loss of power on transmission lines. I haven't done the math myself, but overall electric should be more efficient than gasoline cars.
Doing a two minute google search turns out the authors are an undergrad university student (according to LinkedIn) without a research background (google scholar turns empty), and a researcher with a company that develops combustion engines
Not to pull an ad-hominem here, but I'd take the paper with lots of grains of salt.
With Kent Brockman
It's still the fifth
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
The fifth + habeas corpus? This guy has the shittiest lawyer ever or am I missing something?
Symantec will go into the pharmaceutical business? ;)
Goldman Sachs!
Synonym with trustworthiness and financial stability. Just exactly where I want to put all my money in!
Glad to
http://www.macworld.com/articl...
Make it HAL's voice and I'll switch it right away. Specially if after searching for something it didn't find it, it said. I'm sorry (Your Name), I'm afraid I can't do that .
I thought the same thing, so I roughly parsed the article. It requires at two antennae and needs to know the distance in between those. Basically is doing stereo vision using wifi instead of cameras.
Now I don't know if or how they managed to control each antenna separately, though they do mention they hacked a wifi driver. Also, in their implementation they cite using two devices, not one.
Yes, yes and yes.
See, setting aside the argument whether it serves its purpose or not, the police is a public entity. They can carry guns not because they want to, but because we let them. We delegate authority under the condition that they will use that authority for the common good and use their weapons to enforce it. We also set up a screening and training program to make sure policemen know how and when to use that force.
However, I never agreed to Mr. John Wayne to play hero with my family sitting around next to him. If he wants a gun to protect his home, that's fine by me. But when I don't trust a stranger's ability to use a gun near myself my loved ones. So yes, I find it appalling the need that some people have to want to play real life Cowboys and Indians.
As for criminals. Well, they're criminals. Of course they'll break the law.
"A boy spotted me in [a] restaurant and said loudly, 'Mommy, Mommy, that guy's got a gun!'
So instead of thinking "maybe I shouldn't carry a weapon when I go to a family restaurant", his first reaction was "How can I hide it better?".
Faith in humanity: Lost.
Steam is just an application. A 2D, an off-the-mill application with a browser stuffed inside it.
Wake me up when it runs DirectX games.
From the document (emphasis mine):
Apple asserts that functional source code in a corporation's commercial product is core protected speech, such that asking it to modify that software on one device—to permit the execution of a lawful warrant—is compelled speech in violation of the First Amendment. This claim "trivializes the freedom protected in Barnette and Wooley"
Before reaching the specifics of Apple’s claim, it is important to start with a threshold observation: the “essential operations” of the American legal system rest upon people sometimes having to say things that they would rather not say—such as when a witness is subpoenaed and sworn to speak the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
I don't know if they're being intentionally thick, but there is a huge difference between telling someone "tell the truth" and "this is exactly what I want you to say". This is very, very dangerous.
This is so down the thread no one's going to read it, but here's my $0.02.
The US only has one good thing going right now for them: the IT and Technology sector. It has no manufacturing (that's all down in China now), and besides Google, Apple is the only big one in the game.
If the FBI forces Apple to give out their source code, this is how is see it playing out:
- Not only the US but the rest of the world loses confidence in Apple products.
- Apple stock drops like a sack of potatoes.
- Apple is forced to downsize: massive layoffs
- Poor sales of Apple products make having the source for iOS irrelevant (no one is using them) and the FBI ends up with its finger up its ass anyway.
That jewel goes to the pulldown tray in front of you... where you eat your meals.
http://edition.cnn.com/2015/09...
Not for free, they won't ;3
Holy shit, that newspeak.