People - there is a much simpler explanation. Hillary wasn't held accountable because they are all criminals and are scared if we do one we will get a taste for it.
Deny that most of the artists and writers learned the liberal arts at college. I dare you. That's why we need to defund education, there is no reasoning with these people.
The definition of a soul from a religious perspective seems to include the essential element(s) of containing what makes you a person, but isn't really about the material world, it often has a timeless or immortal quality ascribed to it. Anyone who is impartial to reality knows its bullshit there is something special about the atoms, molecules, or in any way the physical makeup of people. Furthermore, and it pains me to even mention it, it should be obvious that just because consciousness is weird, does not mean its related to any quantum new age bull crap, nor does it require any explanation outside of the mundane. Its painfully clear we are our brains and what we experience of existence is an emergent property that comes about specifically because of how we store, process and take in new sensory information. Therefore it follows that a particular arrangement of the correct particle types, at any given instant in life or perhaps the family of all such instants across your life, really seems to fit the religious definition of a soul. Just because it is difficult to achieve an arrangement artificially of sufficient resolution today in 2018 does not invalidate the premise of the argument. If we set the time of our observable universe back to as near zero as possible, each unique human that was ever to live, but moreover, each human that is possible was baked right into the universe as a real (admittedly low from that time and point perspective) probability. There isn't a time component to it really, nor a spatial one it seems, outside of existing in a particular time or place with one of those configurations, or something within a reasonable resolution of it. A particular person may be born or die, but the possibility of each of our existences within the laws of physics is not something that can be created or destroyed and to me that information looks like a soul.
I am not necessarily convinced myself that space is truly flat, if its not it wouldn't invalidate the similarity to a soul argument. I'm in the camp its likely to have some slight curvature, but has been stretched flat beyond the ability to see it. If it were possible to actually calculate the expected distance to a far off part of the universe were alternate humans nearly identical to us exist, much less a version of you or I to a sufficient resolution, I'm pretty sure if you measured it in observable universe diameters it would make Graham's number look infinitesimal.
exactly. i mean, if they are pushing truth and not lies, shouldnt we be more upset with our own government for lying to us??
Whoa, whoa, whoa. Are you trying to say that maybe we should focus on what's actually important, affecting us daily, and under our control?!? Good, because I'm pretty sure the answer is in her goddamn emails.
I'll just add that making more people aware of how clean thier power is at any particular time should be a bigger priority. Optimizing ev charging times would be a great way to make an impact today and will certainly be a major focus as more vehicles use electric motors.
The colloquial terms used for regional areas and the regions on your map link have some overlap. Also it's misleading. It is an average for that region. Say there is quite a bit of solar in the region so your equivelant is 50+, but you only charge your ev overnight where it will be more like 32+ due to the coal base load. Or say you have a solar installation and a battery, maybe you get 180+. It's in the details and even these reports can easily be misleading.
For an electric car analogy it's like saying electric car maximum efficiency is very low because when the battery is depleted there is still lots of energy potential still in the battery. it's not available, nor practical to think of it that way, it's even misleading from the point of how well the car does its job.
I'm seriously sick and tired of the bullshit definition of thermal efficiency cycles, casuals and even many undergrads get the wrong impression. You need to have your cold side sink at absolute zero, this limits any practical process to a low efficiency, and is technically correct but horribly misleading. Moreover it's bullshit because after your exaust dips below ambient temperature you are actually throwing away useful energy, no one pays for the base thermal energy in the atmosphere so the dollar cost is zero and most textbooks argue this energy is unavailable (ironically). More emphasis needs to be put on the upper bound of possible efficiency using the actual thermal resivoirs at hand and rating efficiency (utilization efficiency) as a percentage of the theoretical maximum given those constraints. It's like when they teach you in 1st year mechanical engineering where the isothermal expansion of a cylinder is efficient. Great! But seriously emphasize the fact it's efficient because you are taking thermal energy you didn't pay for from the atmosphere (most new students leave it off the energy balance lol). Car engine is 18% efficient? Great! But a better way to say it is 50% utilization of available thermal energy. In this case it's the emphasis on how well the engine does compared to what's really possible and gives a cleaner impression of the bigger picture on how well the engine does it's job. I guess it's not as sexy to say 50% thermal utilization efficiency, but it's what gives a clearer impression to the general public.
I'm seriously sick and tired of the bullshit definition of thermal efficiency cycles. You need to have your cold side sink at absolute zero, this limits any practical process to a low efficiency, and is technically correct but horribly misleading. Moreover it's bullshit because after your exaust dips below ambient temperature you are actually throwing away useful energy, no one pays for the base thermal energy in the atmosphere so the dollar cost is zero and most textbooks argue this energy is unavailable (ironically). More emphasis needs to be put on the upper bound of possible efficiency using the actual thermal resivoirs at hand and rating efficiency as a percentage of the theoretical maximum given those constraints. It's like when they teach you in 1st year mechanical engineering where the isothermal expansion of a cylinder is efficient. Great! But seriously emphasize the fact it's efficient because you are taking thermal energy you didn't pay for from the atmosphere (most new students leave it off the energy balance lol). Car engine is 18% efficient? Great! But a better way to say it is 42% utilization of available thermal energy.
Lol you aren't from Norway. In Norway nearly 100% of new cars have a plug. It's just on intetnal combustion engines it's used to heat the block so the damn thing actually starts in winter.
Also it is 100% correct EV are only as green as where you get your electricity. Here in the Midwest electric cars get roughly 35-45 Mpg equivelant CO2. Upstate New York or countries like Norway are over 120 Mpg due to the cleaner nature of the power, though hydro does have its own significant environmental impact.
If you consider 10Mbps up and 1 down or more high speed then there is only cellular, with its high price, satellite, with its high price and latency, DSL won't consistently hit these speeds here and one single cable internet provider choice. There are three (at least) cable ISP in my area with about 20% overlap tops, 80% of millions of people have 1 choice, 20% have 2+. You are just poorly informed, its probably not your fault. There really are many laws that create ISP monopolies and conservative sources not just liberals bitch about them, but don't let facts get in the way of any of your fun.
Because, screw it its Monday, I'm going to one up you by giving all that plus the nagging suspicion that the flaws in the architecture were identified but "overlooked" by some individuals near the original time of implementation. Even in retrospect it's hard to imagine how absolutely no one caught onto either of the exploits, but doubly so meltdown.
The assumption is the shape of curvature of the universe due to gravity (more or less). Omega (curvature) can be measured several ways. So far it is very close to 1 inside the margin of error to be infinite (1) but at least 1000 times the size of the visible universe or so. It can't truly be infinite because it is quantized and if you assume a fixed observation volume that volume would have an expected distance to simply repeat itself exactly.
Further than that, each human that exists is a unique collection of particles at each point in thier existence operating under simple natural laws. They define who you are, your memories, and are the source of the emergent behavior that is you. Any of these arrangements is a valid solution to the mathematical laws of physics in our universe and cannot ever be destroyed as a possibility as long as the universe exists or (probably equivalently) someone simulates it with enough fidelity. If space is truly flat, and thus infinite, it would mean every possibility of you would exist somewhere and when. So, in essence, science says we all have eternal souls.
Same way we deliver internet. Rail would be analogous to a fiber optic cable and it's just slightly different version of the same last mile problem ISP face.
I live in a major metropolitan center and have exactly 1 choice for high speed internet. Since cable is the only high speed internet technology that does deliver bandwidth at reasonable cost (haha fiber in my dreams), and other cable providers are prohibited by state and local laws in my and many areas, it is an apt metaphor. I'm not alone, a very large percentage of Americans are forced into one choice by the monopoly granted by the government.
I came to the same startling conclusion after talking to a "PhD" mechanical engineer at a medium sized contract manufacturer and discovering they couldn't explain the technical side how a hammer works.
There would be no trade secrets, no workaround to time X. You cannot remove security through obscurity in business but you can set the precedent that anyone not under an nda may make it public since it is not being patented, copyrighted, or otherwise claimed proprietary. Further still that companies be required to hold a copy of all released versions of thier code, similar to tax records, for X years at which point they will become public domain.
Slashdot Mirror
Where are my mod points when I need them?
It's not paranoia if they really are out to get you.
People - there is a much simpler explanation. Hillary wasn't held accountable because they are all criminals and are scared if we do one we will get a taste for it.
A bit too much publicity stunt in it for my taste as well. Someone should encourage the monopoly man protester to come up with something.
The second tactic describes how a commercial itself could transmit an inaudible acoustic signal to tell Alexa to ignore its wake word.
Step 1: A dedicated, battery operated, highly miniature device to emit said signal
Step 2: ??? Alexa remains silent...
Step 3: Profit!
Nah damnnit, I just need to ooze some more sarcasm in somehow. If my comment turned a bit Poe there I apologize to all.
Deny that most of the artists and writers learned the liberal arts at college. I dare you. That's why we need to defund education, there is no reasoning with these people.
The definition of a soul from a religious perspective seems to include the essential element(s) of containing what makes you a person, but isn't really about the material world, it often has a timeless or immortal quality ascribed to it. Anyone who is impartial to reality knows its bullshit there is something special about the atoms, molecules, or in any way the physical makeup of people. Furthermore, and it pains me to even mention it, it should be obvious that just because consciousness is weird, does not mean its related to any quantum new age bull crap, nor does it require any explanation outside of the mundane. Its painfully clear we are our brains and what we experience of existence is an emergent property that comes about specifically because of how we store, process and take in new sensory information. Therefore it follows that a particular arrangement of the correct particle types, at any given instant in life or perhaps the family of all such instants across your life, really seems to fit the religious definition of a soul. Just because it is difficult to achieve an arrangement artificially of sufficient resolution today in 2018 does not invalidate the premise of the argument. If we set the time of our observable universe back to as near zero as possible, each unique human that was ever to live, but moreover, each human that is possible was baked right into the universe as a real (admittedly low from that time and point perspective) probability. There isn't a time component to it really, nor a spatial one it seems, outside of existing in a particular time or place with one of those configurations, or something within a reasonable resolution of it. A particular person may be born or die, but the possibility of each of our existences within the laws of physics is not something that can be created or destroyed and to me that information looks like a soul.
I am not necessarily convinced myself that space is truly flat, if its not it wouldn't invalidate the similarity to a soul argument. I'm in the camp its likely to have some slight curvature, but has been stretched flat beyond the ability to see it. If it were possible to actually calculate the expected distance to a far off part of the universe were alternate humans nearly identical to us exist, much less a version of you or I to a sufficient resolution, I'm pretty sure if you measured it in observable universe diameters it would make Graham's number look infinitesimal.
exactly. i mean, if they are pushing truth and not lies, shouldnt we be more upset with our own government for lying to us??
Whoa, whoa, whoa. Are you trying to say that maybe we should focus on what's actually important, affecting us daily, and under our control?!? Good, because I'm pretty sure the answer is in her goddamn emails.
I'll just add that making more people aware of how clean thier power is at any particular time should be a bigger priority. Optimizing ev charging times would be a great way to make an impact today and will certainly be a major focus as more vehicles use electric motors.
The colloquial terms used for regional areas and the regions on your map link have some overlap. Also it's misleading. It is an average for that region. Say there is quite a bit of solar in the region so your equivelant is 50+, but you only charge your ev overnight where it will be more like 32+ due to the coal base load. Or say you have a solar installation and a battery, maybe you get 180+. It's in the details and even these reports can easily be misleading.
Lmafo! Did you read your link? It says 35-45 so I'm right on. I should have specified lower mid west I suppose.
For an electric car analogy it's like saying electric car maximum efficiency is very low because when the battery is depleted there is still lots of energy potential still in the battery. it's not available, nor practical to think of it that way, it's even misleading from the point of how well the car does its job.
I'm seriously sick and tired of the bullshit definition of thermal efficiency cycles, casuals and even many undergrads get the wrong impression. You need to have your cold side sink at absolute zero, this limits any practical process to a low efficiency, and is technically correct but horribly misleading. Moreover it's bullshit because after your exaust dips below ambient temperature you are actually throwing away useful energy, no one pays for the base thermal energy in the atmosphere so the dollar cost is zero and most textbooks argue this energy is unavailable (ironically). More emphasis needs to be put on the upper bound of possible efficiency using the actual thermal resivoirs at hand and rating efficiency (utilization efficiency) as a percentage of the theoretical maximum given those constraints. It's like when they teach you in 1st year mechanical engineering where the isothermal expansion of a cylinder is efficient. Great! But seriously emphasize the fact it's efficient because you are taking thermal energy you didn't pay for from the atmosphere (most new students leave it off the energy balance lol). Car engine is 18% efficient? Great! But a better way to say it is 50% utilization of available thermal energy. In this case it's the emphasis on how well the engine does compared to what's really possible and gives a cleaner impression of the bigger picture on how well the engine does it's job. I guess it's not as sexy to say 50% thermal utilization efficiency, but it's what gives a clearer impression to the general public.
I'm seriously sick and tired of the bullshit definition of thermal efficiency cycles. You need to have your cold side sink at absolute zero, this limits any practical process to a low efficiency, and is technically correct but horribly misleading. Moreover it's bullshit because after your exaust dips below ambient temperature you are actually throwing away useful energy, no one pays for the base thermal energy in the atmosphere so the dollar cost is zero and most textbooks argue this energy is unavailable (ironically). More emphasis needs to be put on the upper bound of possible efficiency using the actual thermal resivoirs at hand and rating efficiency as a percentage of the theoretical maximum given those constraints. It's like when they teach you in 1st year mechanical engineering where the isothermal expansion of a cylinder is efficient. Great! But seriously emphasize the fact it's efficient because you are taking thermal energy you didn't pay for from the atmosphere (most new students leave it off the energy balance lol). Car engine is 18% efficient? Great! But a better way to say it is 42% utilization of available thermal energy.
Lol you aren't from Norway. In Norway nearly 100% of new cars have a plug. It's just on intetnal combustion engines it's used to heat the block so the damn thing actually starts in winter.
Also it is 100% correct EV are only as green as where you get your electricity. Here in the Midwest electric cars get roughly 35-45 Mpg equivelant CO2. Upstate New York or countries like Norway are over 120 Mpg due to the cleaner nature of the power, though hydro does have its own significant environmental impact.
Lol pi is not a matrix that is quantized and finite. Nice irrational argument though.
If you consider 10Mbps up and 1 down or more high speed then there is only cellular, with its high price, satellite, with its high price and latency, DSL won't consistently hit these speeds here and one single cable internet provider choice. There are three (at least) cable ISP in my area with about 20% overlap tops, 80% of millions of people have 1 choice, 20% have 2+. You are just poorly informed, its probably not your fault. There really are many laws that create ISP monopolies and conservative sources not just liberals bitch about them, but don't let facts get in the way of any of your fun.
Because, screw it its Monday, I'm going to one up you by giving all that plus the nagging suspicion that the flaws in the architecture were identified but "overlooked" by some individuals near the original time of implementation. Even in retrospect it's hard to imagine how absolutely no one caught onto either of the exploits, but doubly so meltdown.
Yea, it was probably an auto erect mistake.
The assumption is the shape of curvature of the universe due to gravity (more or less). Omega (curvature) can be measured several ways. So far it is very close to 1 inside the margin of error to be infinite (1) but at least 1000 times the size of the visible universe or so. It can't truly be infinite because it is quantized and if you assume a fixed observation volume that volume would have an expected distance to simply repeat itself exactly.
Further than that, each human that exists is a unique collection of particles at each point in thier existence operating under simple natural laws. They define who you are, your memories, and are the source of the emergent behavior that is you. Any of these arrangements is a valid solution to the mathematical laws of physics in our universe and cannot ever be destroyed as a possibility as long as the universe exists or (probably equivalently) someone simulates it with enough fidelity. If space is truly flat, and thus infinite, it would mean every possibility of you would exist somewhere and when. So, in essence, science says we all have eternal souls.
Same way we deliver internet. Rail would be analogous to a fiber optic cable and it's just slightly different version of the same last mile problem ISP face.
I live in a major metropolitan center and have exactly 1 choice for high speed internet. Since cable is the only high speed internet technology that does deliver bandwidth at reasonable cost (haha fiber in my dreams), and other cable providers are prohibited by state and local laws in my and many areas, it is an apt metaphor. I'm not alone, a very large percentage of Americans are forced into one choice by the monopoly granted by the government.
I came to the same startling conclusion after talking to a "PhD" mechanical engineer at a medium sized contract manufacturer and discovering they couldn't explain the technical side how a hammer works.
There would be no trade secrets, no workaround to time X. You cannot remove security through obscurity in business but you can set the precedent that anyone not under an nda may make it public since it is not being patented, copyrighted, or otherwise claimed proprietary. Further still that companies be required to hold a copy of all released versions of thier code, similar to tax records, for X years at which point they will become public domain.