The car in TFA didn't have a battery. The solar panels are connected directly to the drive train/motor(s).
Also from TFA (or associated news reports), the lack of battery was to raise, not lower, final speed.
I also found the low speed pretty iffy given that in past races, racers have happily exceeded 120-130km/h. I'm assuming it was either an average over a long distance, or otherwise subject to criteria not mentioned to slow it down.
Your number plate is one thing. Your number plate, make of car, route to work, and usual parking place are QUITE another thing. Especially if you drive something worth stealing. Now say there's a similar leak at the main BMW showroom near you, and you drive a BMW. Cross reference the two and they now know your car's activation code. Hurrah!
ACLs ? group based authorization ? For example, very few people should be allowed to view credit card numbers, a representative should only be allowed to view his own customers data, etc.
At the very least I'd want them to only make customer data available over a secure site on their own WAN-based intranet. I'm a Vodafone customer and I'm really not happy about this. Why the HELL would you have any sensitive customer data on an internet-facing machine?
Part of the scientific method is to give up after a while. There has not once, ever, been a scientifically valid positive result from a single test for ghosts. Further research in the area, after this much overwhelming evidence, is useless.
There has never been a scientifically valid positive test result from a single test for ghosts.
Therefore there has never been a genuine ghost siting.
Therefore no positive result from a test for ghosts has been scientifically valid.
My aunt had several problems that cleared up when she switched to a gluten free diet. Obviously that's not the same as a scientific double-blind trial, but hey, it worked. (I'm fond of telling people that if I don't
Interestingly, my cousin (the son of said aunt) had severe behavioural problems until they cut all red/yellow food colouring out of his diet. Seriously, give the kid a cheezel and he'd go fucking mental. Keep him away from that stuff and he was a great little kid.
Of course you are fooling yourself. Everyone in our IT shop is near-ASD; one more symptom each and we'd all be eligible for disability.
I find a lot of this stuff depends hugely on your environment. For instance, I know one of my personality flaws is that I get bored easily if I'm not being challenged. My last job, I was pretty much The Flake from the article. My first assignment at the job, my boss gave me something that was meant to take two days and I had it done in two hours. My first few months were great, but after a while I really started struggling to focus because I was just that bored. Add in some bad stuff at the time relationship-wise and I turned up to work late and still half drunk more often than I'd want to admit.
My current job, I'm not having that trouble, because the job itself really f**king hard (motion control for highly nonlinear multi-axis hydraulic mechanisms). So I can maintain my levels of awesomeness instead of sinking into that hole of boring.
Interestingly, while the team I'm in is probably the most technically capable I've ever worked with, they're also far more stable and sociable than most 'tech people'. Apart from a certain 'geekiness' which is basically just interest in understanding the world around you, I disagree that strong technical skills necessarily imply a lack of social intelligence.
That said, I'm starting to wonder about miss-direction. It does look similar to the F-22, and the US may assume it borrowed more than the look. This would mean they'll get cocky about their ability to detect it, while perhaps the Chinese are working on something very different.
I believe you are correct here. The photographs show a mockup of an F-22 taxiing alongside the new Chinese stealth fighter, which is very stealthy indeed.
Exactly. How hard can it be to evolve past "kill 10 rats"? Text based games 20 years ago had more variety in quests and adventuring.
As one perceptive WoW player said, logging on for the first time after watching the South Park 'Sword of Truth' episode: "They're all boars. Some are bigger, or look different, or have different abilities, but they're all boars."
An officer can't "mishear" what you said if you don't say anything.
Why would they stop at completely fabricating an exchange if, as you say, they're already planting evidence and torturing you into a confession? This bit just seemed bizarrely trusting in the midst of the rest of the paranoia.
Nono - the estimation is to go back from when they do the authoritative test to when they pulled you over. So in your example, if you have a meal, take 3 quick shots then hop in the car, your BAC will still be going up for the next two hours. If they pull you over immediately, then do the test at the station an hour later, your BAC when they test you at the station will be a lot higher than it was when they pulled you over. They can only charge you for your BAC when you were actually driving, so they have to project back. The formula is meant to make it more fair, not less.
They can not forcibly take blood without a warrant unless there is an accident involving a fatality (or one of the other few exceptions).
I see this "can't do X without a warrant" a lot, but it seems to me that this is a rapidly diminishing protection. In TFA they have a judge present at the roadside test who can sign warrants on the spot. I wouldn't be surprised in a few years to see them issuing "warrant kits" which any police officer can use to produce a legally binding warrant on the spot, subject to later review by a judge.
Actually (assuming they calculate it the same in the U.S. as they do in Australia) they have a formula involving the time of your last drink and the time of the reading. That's why, when they ask "when was your last drink", you should always respond that you don't remember - they then have to assume that your last drink was 30 minutes ago, and the formula assumes that blood alcohol rises for two hours after a drink. So in the case that your last drink was actually a few hours ago and your blood alcohol level is falling, the formula will substantially underestimate your blood alcohol level at the time you were pulled over.
Contrary to the parent, sadly, and in line with the GPP, simulating "everything" (for any values of "everything" more detailed than "a game of pool") really IS impossible. There's a reason that despite the thousand-million-fold increase in computational power over the last 70-odd years (between ENIAC and Tianhe-IA... wait a minute, a computer named 'ia' is bad right? If it ever says "fhtagn" it's too late to pull the plug...) anyway, we still can't tell with any surety what the weather will be like 6 days in advance.
Really, sir, if you think that the overuse of punctuation is the only peril implicit in the lack of word limits on student submissions, then I believe that you, sir, are very much mistaken! Indeed, there exists a broad percentage of the sort of students who, while they most usually apply themselves to the arts and, indeed, tend to ultimately engage in a career as a 'rapid cuisine chef', do on occasion attempt to educate themselves on such matters as science and technology. When such worthy fellows begin the arduous task of completing an Internet-based application form such as is mentioned in The Article, the resulting submitted material most often resembles the grammatical and lexical structure embodied within this very post, only in the case of these aspiring technologists, the subject matter is often drawn out over a period of several pages, even when responding to such a simple question as "Name:".
There is absolutely a difference. The MPAA knows it, Comic Book publishers know it, Young Adult fiction publishers know it, Apple knows it, Microsoft knows it, and parents know it.
You'll know it too, someday, perhaps when you're older.
The difference is that our entire culture is so saturated with violent media that we don't hesitate to graphically dismember an innocent bystander in front of a 10-year-old.
Do you even REMEMBER the first violent movie you saw? I was a little sheltered as a kid, and as a result I was just into my teens before I had any exposure either to porn or gratuitous violence. I found my first experience of a genuinely violent movie (Terminator 2) really quite disturbing, and it took me a long time to get used to that. I found my first experience of porn to be interesting (I was a 12 year old boy, I was *already* obsessed with sex) but it didn't leave me feeling sick to the stomach.
Reminds me of when the Concerned Parents of America realised that the PSP and the DS not only had this "wire less thingummy" but that through it they could get on the Intertubes. Suddenly for about two weeks it was "DS and PSP are PORN DEVICES!" *headsmack*
On another note, I find great humor in the fact that Microsoft allows games like Grand Theft Auto, Saw, Deadspace and Assassin's Creed. You know, games that revolve around either dismembering the limbs of your opponents, raping, theft, murder, assassination, or countless other violent crimes that are amongst the most deplored acts of any society, but HEAVEN FORBID someone use their console for what is essentially masturbation and potentially improve their skill at copulating.
Getting offtopic here but this trend has its roots in the way Abrahamic religions control their followers; by vilifying and suppressing the sex drive. With a couple of tiny, unfalsifiable bits of misinformation ('sexual feelings are sinful', and 'God will forgive your sins if you do what I say') they can instill a permanent feeling of guilt.
Slashdot Mirror
The car in TFA didn't have a battery. The solar panels are connected directly to the drive train/motor(s).
Also from TFA (or associated news reports), the lack of battery was to raise, not lower, final speed.
I also found the low speed pretty iffy given that in past races, racers have happily exceeded 120-130km/h. I'm assuming it was either an average over a long distance, or otherwise subject to criteria not mentioned to slow it down.
Hah, screw you, I'm gonna use reverse psychology WHATEVER YOU SAY! HAHAH- wait. :(
Your number plate is one thing. Your number plate, make of car, route to work, and usual parking place are QUITE another thing. Especially if you drive something worth stealing. Now say there's a similar leak at the main BMW showroom near you, and you drive a BMW. Cross reference the two and they now know your car's activation code. Hurrah!
ACLs ? group based authorization ? For example, very few people should be allowed to view credit card numbers, a representative should only be allowed to view his own customers data, etc.
At the very least I'd want them to only make customer data available over a secure site on their own WAN-based intranet. I'm a Vodafone customer and I'm really not happy about this. Why the HELL would you have any sensitive customer data on an internet-facing machine?
And the japanese haven't made porn about it yet?
...the hell makes you think THAT? :P
Part of the scientific method is to give up after a while. There has not once, ever, been a scientifically valid positive result from a single test for ghosts. Further research in the area, after this much overwhelming evidence, is useless.
There has never been a scientifically valid positive test result from a single test for ghosts.
Therefore there has never been a genuine ghost siting.
Therefore no positive result from a test for ghosts has been scientifically valid.
My aunt had several problems that cleared up when she switched to a gluten free diet. Obviously that's not the same as a scientific double-blind trial, but hey, it worked. (I'm fond of telling people that if I don't
Interestingly, my cousin (the son of said aunt) had severe behavioural problems until they cut all red/yellow food colouring out of his diet. Seriously, give the kid a cheezel and he'd go fucking mental. Keep him away from that stuff and he was a great little kid.
Of course you are fooling yourself. Everyone in our IT shop is near-ASD; one more symptom each and we'd all be eligible for disability.
I find a lot of this stuff depends hugely on your environment. For instance, I know one of my personality flaws is that I get bored easily if I'm not being challenged. My last job, I was pretty much The Flake from the article. My first assignment at the job, my boss gave me something that was meant to take two days and I had it done in two hours. My first few months were great, but after a while I really started struggling to focus because I was just that bored. Add in some bad stuff at the time relationship-wise and I turned up to work late and still half drunk more often than I'd want to admit.
My current job, I'm not having that trouble, because the job itself really f**king hard (motion control for highly nonlinear multi-axis hydraulic mechanisms). So I can maintain my levels of awesomeness instead of sinking into that hole of boring.
Interestingly, while the team I'm in is probably the most technically capable I've ever worked with, they're also far more stable and sociable than most 'tech people'. Apart from a certain 'geekiness' which is basically just interest in understanding the world around you, I disagree that strong technical skills necessarily imply a lack of social intelligence.
That said, I'm starting to wonder about miss-direction. It does look similar to the F-22, and the US may assume it borrowed more than the look. This would mean they'll get cocky about their ability to detect it, while perhaps the Chinese are working on something very different.
I believe you are correct here. The photographs show a mockup of an F-22 taxiing alongside the new Chinese stealth fighter, which is very stealthy indeed.
Exactly. How hard can it be to evolve past "kill 10 rats"? Text based games 20 years ago had more variety in quests and adventuring.
As one perceptive WoW player said, logging on for the first time after watching the South Park 'Sword of Truth' episode: "They're all boars. Some are bigger, or look different, or have different abilities, but they're all boars."
An officer can't "mishear" what you said if you don't say anything.
Why would they stop at completely fabricating an exchange if, as you say, they're already planting evidence and torturing you into a confession? This bit just seemed bizarrely trusting in the midst of the rest of the paranoia.
That would be the definition of electrocution, yes. If it's not fatal it's only an electric shock.
There, fixed that for you. Someone who doesn't think household voltages aren't dangerous is a future candidate for the Darwin Awards.
You didn't not emit a double negative. O.o
I'd really hope that instead, they use evidence of your actually orchestrating said attack.
Your idea of using solar powered chickens as a fuel for spaceships intrigues me and I wish to subscribe to your magazine.
No, silly, he's planning to undetectably murder his own grandfather with a chicken on a train.
Nono - the estimation is to go back from when they do the authoritative test to when they pulled you over. So in your example, if you have a meal, take 3 quick shots then hop in the car, your BAC will still be going up for the next two hours. If they pull you over immediately, then do the test at the station an hour later, your BAC when they test you at the station will be a lot higher than it was when they pulled you over. They can only charge you for your BAC when you were actually driving, so they have to project back. The formula is meant to make it more fair, not less.
They can not forcibly take blood without a warrant unless there is an accident involving a fatality (or one of the other few exceptions).
I see this "can't do X without a warrant" a lot, but it seems to me that this is a rapidly diminishing protection. In TFA they have a judge present at the roadside test who can sign warrants on the spot. I wouldn't be surprised in a few years to see them issuing "warrant kits" which any police officer can use to produce a legally binding warrant on the spot, subject to later review by a judge.
Actually (assuming they calculate it the same in the U.S. as they do in Australia) they have a formula involving the time of your last drink and the time of the reading. That's why, when they ask "when was your last drink", you should always respond that you don't remember - they then have to assume that your last drink was 30 minutes ago, and the formula assumes that blood alcohol rises for two hours after a drink. So in the case that your last drink was actually a few hours ago and your blood alcohol level is falling, the formula will substantially underestimate your blood alcohol level at the time you were pulled over.
Simulation Argument. :)
Contrary to the parent, sadly, and in line with the GPP, simulating "everything" (for any values of "everything" more detailed than "a game of pool") really IS impossible. There's a reason that despite the thousand-million-fold increase in computational power over the last 70-odd years (between ENIAC and Tianhe-IA... wait a minute, a computer named 'ia' is bad right? If it ever says "fhtagn" it's too late to pull the plug...) anyway, we still can't tell with any surety what the weather will be like 6 days in advance.
not enough data!!
"...for meaningful answer."
Sounds like it'd turn into Python-with-C-syntax.
Really, sir, if you think that the overuse of punctuation is the only peril implicit in the lack of word limits on student submissions, then I believe that you, sir, are very much mistaken! Indeed, there exists a broad percentage of the sort of students who, while they most usually apply themselves to the arts and, indeed, tend to ultimately engage in a career as a 'rapid cuisine chef', do on occasion attempt to educate themselves on such matters as science and technology. When such worthy fellows begin the arduous task of completing an Internet-based application form such as is mentioned in The Article, the resulting submitted material most often resembles the grammatical and lexical structure embodied within this very post, only in the case of these aspiring technologists, the subject matter is often drawn out over a period of several pages, even when responding to such a simple question as "Name:".
There is absolutely a difference. The MPAA knows it, Comic Book publishers know it, Young Adult fiction publishers know it, Apple knows it, Microsoft knows it, and parents know it.
You'll know it too, someday, perhaps when you're older.
The difference is that our entire culture is so saturated with violent media that we don't hesitate to graphically dismember an innocent bystander in front of a 10-year-old.
Do you even REMEMBER the first violent movie you saw? I was a little sheltered as a kid, and as a result I was just into my teens before I had any exposure either to porn or gratuitous violence. I found my first experience of a genuinely violent movie (Terminator 2) really quite disturbing, and it took me a long time to get used to that. I found my first experience of porn to be interesting (I was a 12 year old boy, I was *already* obsessed with sex) but it didn't leave me feeling sick to the stomach.
Reminds me of when the Concerned Parents of America realised that the PSP and the DS not only had this "wire less thingummy" but that through it they could get on the Intertubes. Suddenly for about two weeks it was "DS and PSP are PORN DEVICES!" *headsmack*
On another note, I find great humor in the fact that Microsoft allows games like Grand Theft Auto, Saw, Deadspace and Assassin's Creed. You know, games that revolve around either dismembering the limbs of your opponents, raping, theft, murder, assassination, or countless other violent crimes that are amongst the most deplored acts of any society, but HEAVEN FORBID someone use their console for what is essentially masturbation and potentially improve their skill at copulating.
Getting offtopic here but this trend has its roots in the way Abrahamic religions control their followers; by vilifying and suppressing the sex drive. With a couple of tiny, unfalsifiable bits of misinformation ('sexual feelings are sinful', and 'God will forgive your sins if you do what I say') they can instill a permanent feeling of guilt.