Sunlight there would be, but no as you know it. Different wavelengths, and somebody smarter than me will now tell us if the wavelengths critical to life as we know it will be present.
Of course they crash. Not every going-down situation warrants a self-destruct. That said, I'm in infantry, not the Air Force, and we do hear too many AF myths. Oh, and not the American infantry, either.
If your definition of "improved" means "adopted American culture and politics", then yes, Japan has improved. Some people would use a different word, however.
So far as I've been led to understand, all manned aeroborne US military craft have self-destruct capability, but it is local-detonation only. No remote detonation, and therefore, none on unmanned craft. Just a short while ago a/. poster commented on the data destruction mechanisms installed on the AWACS plane he was stationed on, so apparently, there are multiple levels of self-induced break-it.
Or target practice? Target practice is exactly what I was thinking too. To show that they _can_ do it. Actually, I'd like to see the Chinese shoot it down first. Would that sour Sinoamerican relations? I think that the credibility it would lend to China would outweigh Bush's anger, and in any case, the satellite is scheduled for decommission anyway.
I accidentally broke the screen. It's now a project waiting to happen. It might see Linux some day and with a 4GB SD card could make for a decent low powered text file and photo home server.
You are not going to believe this, but all my software from my operating systems, to my applications, to my music and videos is legal. No can do pirate ROM. Thanks, though.
Also, 200 mhz really isn't that slow for an embedded device. My Mio 339 had a 233 mhz processor running Windows Mobile 2002. It flew, I really loved it. I replaced it with a Dell Axim x50v Windows Mobile 2003SE. The Dell has a 624 mhz processor and I'm always waiting for it. I believe that speed is 10% hardware, 90% software.
I won't even talk about the performance of Compiz-Fusion on my Inspiron, as compared to Vista on the same hardware that an associate has.
I'm probably in that 6%. I always click the ads on sites that I frequent. To be fair, I spend at least a few minutes on the advertiser's site as well. Only once did it lead to a purchase (PocketPC software), but the option is always there.
Of course, my own sites are funded by advertising, so I have a vested interest in seeing the industry succeed.
One thing that is not argued about is that the "kill" or "murder" part refers to humans. I was unaware that anyone could ever think that the commandment was "do not kill" instead of "do not murder". At least in Hebrew, we have absolutely no confusion.
Thus the reading in context. Reading out of context results in many a discussion about the Biblical justification for self-defense and/or war. Reading (and quoting) out of context is very popular for those who wish to wage war.
(OT but I'm wondering how the comment I just replied to was a troll? Can't mod up a FP no matter what and it actually was on-topic? Beware of us metamods, young moderators! Mod this one any way you want, I don't have to whore for karma) I wondering the same thing. This was [improper] use of a technology that was designed to protect, when in fact the use of said technology provided a problem instead of a benefit. What's trolling about that?
You're welcome. When you come across these questions, you can ask them at the http://what-is-what.com/ website. Just look for the field marked "ask a question".
It would be difficult for us carnivores to eat should we not kill. The Original Testament commands "Do not murder", not "Do not kill". Jesus' recommendation that one "turn the other cheek" was a good 1000 years after God's "do not murder" commandment. So I think that the intent here is clear.
Why does this remind me of the two couples who found that they had one condom between them? The second guy turned the rubber inside out, getting his partner pregnant with the first guy's kid. Protection turned right inside out... providing more harm than good...
Just curious, why was DKIM chosen as an IETF standard and not SPF? Apart from requiring faster machines to implement the crypto for each message, what does DKIM provide that SPF cannot provide? For one thing, as one who travels with his laptop, I cannot use SPF because I'm not always in the same set of mailservers that I've configured. But that is my own problem, not necessarily the reason for the decision. If you ask the IETF and get a response let me know. You might want to review this relevant/. article: http://ask.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/06/22/1547225
Note, there is nothing preventing one from using both DKIM and SPF.
In court, this pointless long-winded nutjob gets tossed to the curb for wasting everyone's time.
In slashdot, this pointless long-winded nutjob becomes a "frequent contributor." In the street, I'm a nutjob that gets tossed to the curb by every girl.
At the sperm bank, this pointless long-winded nutjob becomes a "frequent contributor."
Slashdot Mirror
Sunlight there would be, but no as you know it. Different wavelengths, and somebody smarter than me will now tell us if the wavelengths critical to life as we know it will be present.
####
#### At least the code is well commented.
Of course they crash. Not every going-down situation warrants a self-destruct. That said, I'm in infantry, not the Air Force, and we do hear too many AF myths. Oh, and not the American infantry, either.
If your definition of "improved" means "adopted American culture and politics", then yes, Japan has improved. Some people would use a different word, however.
That said, I dig your sig. Stumbled.
That's still called email. In fact, that was called email _before_ there was a way to exchange them between machines.
So far as I've been led to understand, all manned aeroborne US military craft have self-destruct capability, but it is local-detonation only. No remote detonation, and therefore, none on unmanned craft. Just a short while ago a /. poster commented on the data destruction mechanisms installed on the AWACS plane he was stationed on, so apparently, there are multiple levels of self-induced break-it.
I can see the recursion getting out of hand Total Recall style..
I can see the recursion getting out of hand Total Recall style.
What exactly is a virtual email? Can the system send him one when he gets a real email too?
Why, what else is the internet for?
I accidentally broke the screen. It's now a project waiting to happen. It might see Linux some day and with a 4GB SD card could make for a decent low powered text file and photo home server.
Screencast it and play it back in mplayer. Mplayer on the console is just so much fun.
You are not going to believe this, but all my software from my operating systems, to my applications, to my music and videos is legal. No can do pirate ROM. Thanks, though.
Also, 200 mhz really isn't that slow for an embedded device. My Mio 339 had a 233 mhz processor running Windows Mobile 2002. It flew, I really loved it. I replaced it with a Dell Axim x50v Windows Mobile 2003SE. The Dell has a 624 mhz processor and I'm always waiting for it. I believe that speed is 10% hardware, 90% software.
I won't even talk about the performance of Compiz-Fusion on my Inspiron, as compared to Vista on the same hardware that an associate has.
I'm probably in that 6%. I always click the ads on sites that I frequent. To be fair, I spend at least a few minutes on the advertiser's site as well. Only once did it lead to a purchase (PocketPC software), but the option is always there.
Of course, my own sites are funded by advertising, so I have a vested interest in seeing the industry succeed.
Some like it that way. I did.
You're welcome. When you come across these questions, you can ask them at the http://what-is-what.com/ website. Just look for the field marked "ask a question".
It would be difficult for us carnivores to eat should we not kill. The Original Testament commands "Do not murder", not "Do not kill". Jesus' recommendation that one "turn the other cheek" was a good 1000 years after God's "do not murder" commandment. So I think that the intent here is clear.
Why does this remind me of the two couples who found that they had one condom between them? The second guy turned the rubber inside out, getting his partner pregnant with the first guy's kid. Protection turned right inside out... providing more harm than good...
http://ask.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/06/22/1547225
Note, there is nothing preventing one from using both DKIM and SPF.
In slashdot, this pointless long-winded nutjob becomes a "frequent contributor." In the street, I'm a nutjob that gets tossed to the curb by every girl.
At the sperm bank, this pointless long-winded nutjob becomes a "frequent contributor."
What's wrong with that?