I agree. If anyone can decide what is acceptable, it would have to be those that were victimized.
I don't see it as satirical or ironic, more of as a celebration. Not only did he survive, but it looks to me like he didn't let it prevent him from enjoying life, either.
How about the Orion Nebula, which you can see with the naked eye, even with a good bit of light pollution.
And mayby the Andromeda Galaxy, which you can also see with the naked eye if there isn't much light pollution, and can easily be seen with binoculars or a small telescope.
IAAAA (I am an amateur astronomer) and yes, you want the equipment at the same temp as the surrounding air. Otherwise, the equipment will create a local air current, which would cause optical distortions.
But some would. One associate of his commented on the fact that he felt Push was depressed. Chronic pain can be associated with depression. Sometimes depression can be the cause, and sometimes a symptom of the pain. Regardless of which came first, if there is depression then there is an emotional problem.
How did they initially set up proceedures? I would guess they would use the same proceedures, but with much more outside scrutiny this time, which should help a bit.
I may not be a fan of the current administration, but comparing the US to China in this instance is a bit much. If I disappear forever, someone is going to notice. How many bloggers have disappeared in the last 6 years. I mean truly disappeared, not just quit blogging. Wouldn't their family, friends, or readers go public with the information they could no longer be found (you know, like going to the police or something). How long would it take for the story to be known to a large number of people after that happens? Has anyone even heard urban myths of disappearing bloggers? I haven't, and I think I would hear at least an urban myth or two if it was happening.
Everyone should remember where the majority of lawmakers are from - hint: not the south or the midwest. Both the south and midwest do have a disproportionately large representation in the Senate, but not so in the House. Even in the Senate, I would consider the south and midwest to have no more than half the vote (depends on where you draw the lines).
Doesn't it annoy you that, even with the majority of the vote coming from outside these "trouble" areas, you still have to worry about morality legislation? If it does, consider blaming someone other than religious and/or southern "crazies".
Just wondering why people seem to think all of this comes from the South, when it so often comes from other areas of the country.
Sure, the South has it's fair share of crazies, but I have yet to find a shortage anywhere else. Same goes for people wanting to meddle in my life, but I haven't spent time in Montana yet, and I hear they tend to leave you alone (as long as you actually pay for stuff).
Hey, as long as they limit it to "intellectual property", there's no problem, right? I mean, there's still no such thing, is there? Once they start wanting to block things that are copyrighted and/or patented, then the universities have a problem.
Seriously, it would be nice if politicians would quit using buzz words and actually get involved enough to know what they are talking about and what their bills really accomplish.
As an aside, who here would prefer they spend time trying to figure out how to deal with technological crimes that have consequences that are a bit more serious, like, say, identity theft?
The problem with this is, the people that start out chasing after the sun and the moon and the stars tend to deliver more than the people that deliver exactly what they promised.
Then do it, just don't tell everyone. Is it really going to matter that much to people that chase after the sun and the moon and the stars whether or not someone else knows they are? Public perception has to be taken into consideration, since it effects the resources they have to work with.
I know it takes time to set up business practices and such, but considering the three credit bureaus have been handling freezes in other states for some time, why should they have between May 15, 2007 (when the Tennessee law was signed) to January 1, 2008 (when it goes into effect) to get it started? I would think a month and a half (July 1, 2007) should be enough time to implement in an additional region. Is there something I'm missing here?
Also, spreading the heat across a few thousand homes may decrease the power requirements for cooling (then again, it may increase it). A 380 watt heat source will cause the air conditioner to come on a bit more, but not much. In the winter, the 380 watts will nearly be offset by the reduction in heating costs. I have no personal experience, but I would guess the cooling systems for supercomputers run all year long due to the density of the heat sources.
I hate to repeat a post, but for additional information:
In case anyone is wondering about what the project has acheived so far, here is the link.
Concerning global warming, the processing statistics imply the PS3 is by far the most efficient. At 380 watts, using the statistics given (which are said to be conservative in the case of the PS3), that puts the PS3 at 63 teraFLOPS/megawatt, or 16.5 kilowatts/teraFLOPS. I'm not really familiar with this, but isn't that fairly good? It's definately better than using PCs. Blue Gene/L, which is supposed to be very efficient, will deliver 240,000 FLOPS/watt, or about 0.24 teraFLOPS/megawatt. My calculations may be off, but that suggests the PS3 is highly efficient and a better use of power than a supercomputer.
I'm sure I'm missing some important considerations, so can someone through a little knowledge at this?
In case anyone is wondering about what the project has acheived so far, here is the link.
Concerning global warming, the processing statistics imply the PS3 is by far the most efficient. At 380 watts (at least this is what I've heard), using the statistics given (which are said to be conservative in the case of the PS3), that puts the PS3 at 63 teraFLOPS/megawatt, or 16.5 kilowatts/teraFLOPS. I'm not really familiar with this, but isn't that fairly good? It's definately better than using PCs. Blue Gene/L, which is supposed to be very efficient, will deliver 240,000 FLOPS/watt, or about 0.24 teraFLOPS/megawatt. My calculations may be off, but that suggests the PS3 is highly efficient and a better use of power than a supercomputer.
I'm sure I'm missing some important considerations, so can someone through a little knowledge at this?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but at that point I believe the soap box had been used quite a bit, the ballot and jury boxes were not available, leaving only the final option.
when it happens to them, they can't make noise (that gag order).
But the group I am in (notice I said "we") has not yet received a letter, so we have no gag order on us, and can make noise. Most people may not care until they are effected, but some of us will, so we are the ones that must make the noise.
Yes, it only takes one, although I'm not sure exactly who slipped it in.
Thats the point of (2) and (3). Once a bill has passed, it should still be under scrutiny. Often, software is patched to correct errors, not introduce features. The same should be done with the legal code.
My point was that people sometimes have conflicting moral responsibilites. Yes, providing for their children's freedom and future is a parents responsibility, but so is providing food and shelter and a sense of security. If these two conflict, the parent needs to weigh the benefits of one against the risks of the other to make a responsible choice.
If the family can expect adequate outside help if there is trouble, it is easier to put yourself at risk. If no significant help can be expected, the decision to put yourself at risk is harder. Children and/or illness increase the needs of the family, raising the threshold of what is adequate. For some, shiney things also increase the needs of the family, and I quess that is their right to decide.
Anyone who is unwilling to provide support and has not put themselves or their family in at least similar risk has no right to expect more from someone else. Like you, I don't know what I would do in that situation, but I do know that my situation at the time will effect my decision and I would think long and hard before coming to a final decision. Measure twice, cut once applies to more than just craftsmanship.
I would guess that everyone you listed considered the risks and rewards before making their decision. If not, I believe they were acting recklessly.
Slashdot Mirror
I believe he was referring to mixing metric and imperial units, not mass vs. volume.
I agree. If anyone can decide what is acceptable, it would have to be those that were victimized. I don't see it as satirical or ironic, more of as a celebration. Not only did he survive, but it looks to me like he didn't let it prevent him from enjoying life, either.
Not sure what I did to screw up that second link, but here it is again: Finding the Andromeda Galaxy
How about the Orion Nebula, which you can see with the naked eye, even with a good bit of light pollution. And mayby the Andromeda Galaxy, which you can also see with the naked eye if there isn't much light pollution, and can easily be seen with binoculars or a small telescope.
IAAAA (I am an amateur astronomer) and yes, you want the equipment at the same temp as the surrounding air. Otherwise, the equipment will create a local air current, which would cause optical distortions.
But some would. One associate of his commented on the fact that he felt Push was depressed. Chronic pain can be associated with depression. Sometimes depression can be the cause, and sometimes a symptom of the pain. Regardless of which came first, if there is depression then there is an emotional problem.
I believe the GP was referring to alternative CD/DVD shapes.
How did they initially set up proceedures? I would guess they would use the same proceedures, but with much more outside scrutiny this time, which should help a bit.
Hear, hear!
I may not be a fan of the current administration, but comparing the US to China in this instance is a bit much. If I disappear forever, someone is going to notice. How many bloggers have disappeared in the last 6 years. I mean truly disappeared, not just quit blogging. Wouldn't their family, friends, or readers go public with the information they could no longer be found (you know, like going to the police or something). How long would it take for the story to be known to a large number of people after that happens? Has anyone even heard urban myths of disappearing bloggers? I haven't, and I think I would hear at least an urban myth or two if it was happening.
And how many would have to disappear before someone wondered where their blogger went to?
...only if everyone else lets it.
Everyone should remember where the majority of lawmakers are from - hint: not the south or the midwest. Both the south and midwest do have a disproportionately large representation in the Senate, but not so in the House. Even in the Senate, I would consider the south and midwest to have no more than half the vote (depends on where you draw the lines).
Doesn't it annoy you that, even with the majority of the vote coming from outside these "trouble" areas, you still have to worry about morality legislation? If it does, consider blaming someone other than religious and/or southern "crazies".
New York?
Kansas?
New York again?
Indiana?
Just wondering why people seem to think all of this comes from the South, when it so often comes from other areas of the country. Sure, the South has it's fair share of crazies, but I have yet to find a shortage anywhere else. Same goes for people wanting to meddle in my life, but I haven't spent time in Montana yet, and I hear they tend to leave you alone (as long as you actually pay for stuff).Hey, as long as they limit it to "intellectual property", there's no problem, right? I mean, there's still no such thing, is there? Once they start wanting to block things that are copyrighted and/or patented, then the universities have a problem.
Seriously, it would be nice if politicians would quit using buzz words and actually get involved enough to know what they are talking about and what their bills really accomplish.
As an aside, who here would prefer they spend time trying to figure out how to deal with technological crimes that have consequences that are a bit more serious, like, say, identity theft?
I know it takes time to set up business practices and such, but considering the three credit bureaus have been handling freezes in other states for some time, why should they have between May 15, 2007 (when the Tennessee law was signed) to January 1, 2008 (when it goes into effect) to get it started? I would think a month and a half (July 1, 2007) should be enough time to implement in an additional region. Is there something I'm missing here?
Also, spreading the heat across a few thousand homes may decrease the power requirements for cooling (then again, it may increase it). A 380 watt heat source will cause the air conditioner to come on a bit more, but not much. In the winter, the 380 watts will nearly be offset by the reduction in heating costs. I have no personal experience, but I would guess the cooling systems for supercomputers run all year long due to the density of the heat sources.
Wouldn't this be redundant if it becomes illegal to have porn on port 80?
I hate to repeat a post, but for additional information:
In case anyone is wondering about what the project has acheived so far, here is the link.
Concerning global warming, the processing statistics imply the PS3 is by far the most efficient. At 380 watts, using the statistics given (which are said to be conservative in the case of the PS3), that puts the PS3 at 63 teraFLOPS/megawatt, or 16.5 kilowatts/teraFLOPS. I'm not really familiar with this, but isn't that fairly good? It's definately better than using PCs. Blue Gene/L, which is supposed to be very efficient, will deliver 240,000 FLOPS/watt, or about 0.24 teraFLOPS/megawatt. My calculations may be off, but that suggests the PS3 is highly efficient and a better use of power than a supercomputer.
I'm sure I'm missing some important considerations, so can someone through a little knowledge at this?
In case anyone is wondering about what the project has acheived so far, here is the link.
Concerning global warming, the processing statistics imply the PS3 is by far the most efficient. At 380 watts (at least this is what I've heard), using the statistics given (which are said to be conservative in the case of the PS3), that puts the PS3 at 63 teraFLOPS/megawatt, or 16.5 kilowatts/teraFLOPS. I'm not really familiar with this, but isn't that fairly good? It's definately better than using PCs. Blue Gene/L, which is supposed to be very efficient, will deliver 240,000 FLOPS/watt, or about 0.24 teraFLOPS/megawatt. My calculations may be off, but that suggests the PS3 is highly efficient and a better use of power than a supercomputer.
I'm sure I'm missing some important considerations, so can someone through a little knowledge at this?
I believe the numbers are being taken from this web site.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but at that point I believe the soap box had been used quite a bit, the ballot and jury boxes were not available, leaving only the final option.
http://www.historyplace.com/unitedstates/revolutiBut the group I am in (notice I said "we") has not yet received a letter, so we have no gag order on us, and can make noise. Most people may not care until they are effected, but some of us will, so we are the ones that must make the noise.
Yes, it only takes one, although I'm not sure exactly who slipped it in.
Thats the point of (2) and (3). Once a bill has passed, it should still be under scrutiny. Often, software is patched to correct errors, not introduce features. The same should be done with the legal code.
My point was that people sometimes have conflicting moral responsibilites. Yes, providing for their children's freedom and future is a parents responsibility, but so is providing food and shelter and a sense of security. If these two conflict, the parent needs to weigh the benefits of one against the risks of the other to make a responsible choice.
If the family can expect adequate outside help if there is trouble, it is easier to put yourself at risk. If no significant help can be expected, the decision to put yourself at risk is harder. Children and/or illness increase the needs of the family, raising the threshold of what is adequate. For some, shiney things also increase the needs of the family, and I quess that is their right to decide.
Anyone who is unwilling to provide support and has not put themselves or their family in at least similar risk has no right to expect more from someone else. Like you, I don't know what I would do in that situation, but I do know that my situation at the time will effect my decision and I would think long and hard before coming to a final decision. Measure twice, cut once applies to more than just craftsmanship.
I would guess that everyone you listed considered the risks and rewards before making their decision. If not, I believe they were acting recklessly.