Yes, but did you back up the password book too? Or if it went up in flames with the originals of the data, were you SOL with backups you couldn't decrypt? If the first, you still have to securely store the book somehow.
That's probably not the intent of the law. It's a make-work program. Instead of people pumping their own gas, the stations have to hire a few employees to do the work for them. It's basicaly govornment mucking about with the economy, since the drivers are now essentialy being forced to pay an unidentified tax in the form of slightly higher prices. I'm sure whatever politician thought this up probably threw in some verbage about 'safety' of using 'profesionals' to pump the gas to try and justify the law.
Well technicaly they've got Baals. Seeing as there are more than one of him now. And kudos for his hiding in plain sight.
I also thought that the one Goa'uld that was 'helping' them against the Orai was an interesting take on what might happen to some 'lesser gods' once the empire fell.
I believe the ball has dimples due to the rules of golf. There's all sorts of rules about how the ball is made, shape of the clubs, etc.
Also, the dimples mean that the ball reacts the opposite way to spin than a smooth ball would react. A smooth ball spinning clockwise will hook left due to lower pressure on it's left side due to the bernouli (sp?) effect. A dimpled ball will actualy experience higher pressure on that side and slice right.
This is why topspin is bad (on a drive) for a golfball cause you hit the dirt and loose distance.
I think your European friends are experiencing American beer the way Americans experience Australian beer. There's a reason they export that Fosters stuff.
And also remember, Budweiser (Budvar) started out as a european beer, way back when.
Well seeing as the electricity goes to power things like traffic lights and such, things that the drivers use while on the road, I guess this is more of a pay-to-use type tax.
I guess the tax paying bloke down the street who rides a bike to work will be glad he no longer has to pay for it.
I managed to pay my bill over the phone quickly and efficiently without ever talking to a real person.
Of course they are going to make it easy for you to give them money. I wonder how easily the menu system is set up for cases where they overbill you and you're trying to get them to give you money back?
Except that in multitasking, when a process blocks and swaps you suffer hundreds to thousands of cycles while the OS swaps out processes structs, rewrites VM tables, etc. This usualy happens at the os syscall level too.
In hyperthreading, one thread simply stops contending for functional units for 10s of cycles letting the other, already loaded and running thread max out its ALU/FPU usage while the other waits for cache to get filled from DRAM. This is much higher granularity: the OS doesn't force a swap penalty for every single cache miss, because the act of swapping is way more expensive.
The problem is if both threads are simultaneously memory (vs cpu) intensive then you end up with two waiting threads and don't see a performance boost. Even worse, they both start fighting over the same cache lines. This is the HT process equivalent of virtual memory thrashing, only its at the DRAMcache level instead of the diskDRAM level.
Unless she loses because they hired a whole slew $400/hr lawyers who were better than the single $100/hr lawyer she could afford. Loser pays just discourages the small guy from filing suit, because even if there is only a 10% chance of failure the corporation can screw him by hiring the best/most expensive legal costs possible.
Loser pays the would possibly work a bit better if you were forced to pay the other side the equivalent ofyour legal fees instead of theirs. I.e. if you loose your legal fees can only double (if your lawyer doesn't give you a "win or I'm free" gaurantee.)
The added bonus is that both sides are encouraged to make the case more breif, with fewer lawyers involved.
The analogy is almost correct. Now imagine the blood did cause pain, perhaps even more pain than the initial hammer blow. (Who knows, perhaps you an Alien?)
But what's the solution? A. Soak up the blood temporarily untill it bleeds back out causing more pain again. B. Stop hitting your fingers with a freakin' hammer.
The parent got it almost right. evw seems to imply a runaway chain reaction, even though there is a stable equilibrium. When a true atmospheric forcing agent causes the temperature to rise more water vapor is released, amplifying the effect. But there is a finite limit, even if it is >100% amplification. In fact, H20 accounts for 1/3 to 2/3 of the greenhouse effect (compare with 10-25% for CO2.)
But this vapor is just a feedback effect, not an atmospheric forcing. This is due to the incredibly short residence time of water in the atmosphere of ~10 days. This means that even if you could somehow instantly cause the earth to have 0% humidity everywhere, things would stabalize back to "normal" within about 20-30. True forcings like CO2 have residence time of decades, which makes them the greenhouse gas to worry about.
Everyone posting here should first read this article for the full explination. The site in general is excelent.
But for physical things, at least the evidence is harder to get rid of. What evidence do you have of a bit flip?
Also, with both an e and p trail, you can check them against each other. It may be more dificult to figgure out which one is wrong if there is a discrepancy, but at least you'll know to look for a problem.
> What does that say about humans?
>It's all about perception. From our point of view, some things may look too complex to be formed accidentally.
And having an intelligent being (a human scientist) create life is evidence in favor of evolution over intelligent design how? If anything it will encourage the creationist (excuse me, intelligent design) camp more.
Not that I believe their nonsense. That life can be created from scratch by intelligece doesn't mean that our life was created that way. But then the I.D. supporters aren't exactly a paragon of logic either.
> Boom, and you'll have both stored energy and air to inhale.
Actualy that should read: "...and you'll have stored energy or air to inhale." For each H2, O2 pair that you create you can either recombine for electrical energy, or let your body use the O2. Unless you have a way to fuse the H2 that's left over into He. Though if at any point anything really does go "Boom" you've got other problems.:-)
String theory is unfalsifiable, and it explains no known phenomenon that isn't already explained by another theory.
These are two complaints about string theory that I always see repeated but never see fully explained.
1. By 'unfalsifiable', do you mean currently unfalsifiable by today's technology? This doesn't invalidate the theory. Or is it practicaly unfalsifiable given any level of technology and can never be disproven no mater what? Which makes a theory meaningless in scientific terms.
2. Why does a new theory have to explain more than current theory? Just because a human being formulated some other theory first doesn't make the first theory more or less valid than a second one. It seems that theories with equivalent predictive powers are equaly valid untill disproven. Which brings me to:
3. The two complaints contradict. Either string theory predcits something that another competing theory X does not predict, thus making it falsifiable. Or they predict exactly the same things about the universe. In which case theory X would also be unfalsifiable and equaly invalid.
As a regular cell phone user, even if you start from the assumption that cell phone ratdiation is bad, it's still better to be close to a tower. Why? Because modern handsets will adjust their power output depending on how far you are from the tower. Yeah, the tower may be putting out 100x the power, but your brain is >>100x closer to your own handset. Its 1/r^2 folks. In fact the taller the tower the better.
Couldn't being put on a blacklist be considered libel? MAPS is effectivly saying "the folowing IP addresses belong to spamers and aught to be blocked..." If you are not a spamer, but your IP address is on their list, isn't this libel?
Couldn't you possibly take them to court, especialy if ISP are blocking you as a result and you are experiencing demonstrable financial losses due to the word of MAPS?
I'd be like me telling people "Don't eat at Papa Juan's, they use spam instead of ham on their pizzas." when this is a (known) lie. (ok ok, so this would be slander not libel, but same thing.)
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, but did you back up the password book too? Or if it went up in flames with the originals of the data, were you SOL with backups you couldn't decrypt? If the first, you still have to securely store the book somehow.
That's probably not the intent of the law. It's a make-work program. Instead of people pumping their own gas, the stations have to hire a few employees to do the work for them. It's basicaly govornment mucking about with the economy, since the drivers are now essentialy being forced to pay an unidentified tax in the form of slightly higher prices. I'm sure whatever politician thought this up probably threw in some verbage about 'safety' of using 'profesionals' to pump the gas to try and justify the law.
I also thought that the one Goa'uld that was 'helping' them against the Orai was an interesting take on what might happen to some 'lesser gods' once the empire fell.
...and it ended up as part of slashback. what a ripoff
I'm sorry, would you like a refund?
Also, the dimples mean that the ball reacts the opposite way to spin than a smooth ball would react. A smooth ball spinning clockwise will hook left due to lower pressure on it's left side due to the bernouli (sp?) effect. A dimpled ball will actualy experience higher pressure on that side and slice right.
This is why topspin is bad (on a drive) for a golfball cause you hit the dirt and loose distance.
And also remember, Budweiser (Budvar) started out as a european beer, way back when.
It's the only way to be sure.
I guess the tax paying bloke down the street who rides a bike to work will be glad he no longer has to pay for it.
Of course they are going to make it easy for you to give them money. I wonder how easily the menu system is set up for cases where they overbill you and you're trying to get them to give you money back?
In hyperthreading, one thread simply stops contending for functional units for 10s of cycles letting the other, already loaded and running thread max out its ALU/FPU usage while the other waits for cache to get filled from DRAM. This is much higher granularity: the OS doesn't force a swap penalty for every single cache miss, because the act of swapping is way more expensive.
The problem is if both threads are simultaneously memory (vs cpu) intensive then you end up with two waiting threads and don't see a performance boost. Even worse, they both start fighting over the same cache lines. This is the HT process equivalent of virtual memory thrashing, only its at the DRAMcache level instead of the diskDRAM level.
Loser pays the would possibly work a bit better if you were forced to pay the other side the equivalent ofyour legal fees instead of theirs. I.e. if you loose your legal fees can only double (if your lawyer doesn't give you a "win or I'm free" gaurantee.)
The added bonus is that both sides are encouraged to make the case more breif, with fewer lawyers involved.
But what's the solution?
A. Soak up the blood temporarily untill it bleeds back out causing more pain again.
B. Stop hitting your fingers with a freakin' hammer.
But this vapor is just a feedback effect, not an atmospheric forcing. This is due to the incredibly short residence time of water in the atmosphere of ~10 days. This means that even if you could somehow instantly cause the earth to have 0% humidity everywhere, things would stabalize back to "normal" within about 20-30. True forcings like CO2 have residence time of decades, which makes them the greenhouse gas to worry about.
Everyone posting here should first read this article for the full explination. The site in general is excelent.
But for physical things, at least the evidence is harder to get rid of. What evidence do you have of a bit flip? Also, with both an e and p trail, you can check them against each other. It may be more dificult to figgure out which one is wrong if there is a discrepancy, but at least you'll know to look for a problem.
>It's all about perception. From our point of view, some things may look too complex to be formed accidentally.
And having an intelligent being (a human scientist) create life is evidence in favor of evolution over intelligent design how? If anything it will encourage the creationist (excuse me, intelligent design) camp more.
Not that I believe their nonsense. That life can be created from scratch by intelligece doesn't mean that our life was created that way. But then the I.D. supporters aren't exactly a paragon of logic either.
Actualy that should read: :-)
"...and you'll have stored energy or air to inhale." For each H2, O2 pair that you create you can either recombine for electrical energy, or let your body use the O2. Unless you have a way to fuse the H2 that's left over into He. Though if at any point anything really does go "Boom" you've got other problems.
Manhattan is that small? Wow.
Four could be a double date, but five is just a bad reality tv show.
These are two complaints about string theory that I always see repeated but never see fully explained.
1. By 'unfalsifiable', do you mean currently unfalsifiable by today's technology? This doesn't invalidate the theory. Or is it practicaly unfalsifiable given any level of technology and can never be disproven no mater what? Which makes a theory meaningless in scientific terms.
2. Why does a new theory have to explain more than current theory? Just because a human being formulated some other theory first doesn't make the first theory more or less valid than a second one. It seems that theories with equivalent predictive powers are equaly valid untill disproven. Which brings me to:
3. The two complaints contradict. Either string theory predcits something that another competing theory X does not predict, thus making it falsifiable. Or they predict exactly the same things about the universe. In which case theory X would also be unfalsifiable and equaly invalid.
There is also a theory that evaporating/subliming methane deposits can also sink ships due to the aerated water not being dense enough.
There is also speculation that the Bermuda Triangle has lots of these unstable deposits. Would explain a few things.
Too bad the FOX execs were a bunch of BUN tyen-shung duh ee-DWAY-RO the first time arround.
Give the show to a network that knows what it's doing and appreciate what it has got.
Now an eye-sore, it still can be.
Couldn't being put on a blacklist be considered libel? MAPS is effectivly saying "the folowing IP addresses belong to spamers and aught to be blocked..." If you are not a spamer, but your IP address is on their list, isn't this libel? Couldn't you possibly take them to court, especialy if ISP are blocking you as a result and you are experiencing demonstrable financial losses due to the word of MAPS? I'd be like me telling people "Don't eat at Papa Juan's, they use spam instead of ham on their pizzas." when this is a (known) lie. (ok ok, so this would be slander not libel, but same thing.)
But then again it's handy that criminals are stupid by default, it makes them easier to catch.
No, its just the stupid (and unlucky) criminals that get caught. You never hear about the smart ones, almost by definition.
Uh. Dude. It's not your country. We settled this, like, over 200 years ago. Get over it already.