I would think it would be obvious why they put contacts on rabbits. They tried it on cats, but they gave up after they had to amputate a scientist's arm from the claw damage.
We have major tsunamis somewhere on Earth at least every few decades. It seems to me that the odds are slim that something similar to this (the destruction of everyone a person knows) did not happen at least once in the history of the planet. The stories may have the same origin or may simply have been copied from one another. Hard to say. Either way, there's a good chance that there is a true story at its core, albeit probably a much older story than any of the tellings that are known to still exist today.
Bombs in luggage are much more likely to be detected. Among other things, they have to pass nitrate sniffers, X-ray scans (that electronically highlight stuff with the same density as known explosives), etc. And they have to have a trigger mechanism, which means an electronics package inside that is likely to get close scrutiny, particularly if it has wires going out to other parts of your luggage.... Actual bombs aren't nearly as hard to detect as manually-triggered explosive substances on someone's person.
But if bombs are simpler than missiles, why not just do what the Libyans did with Pan-Am 103 and check luggage with the bomb in it, then not get on the plane? Even if the bomb is caught in scanning, your guy presumably used a false ID and won't be caught.
Simple. If you don't board, they pull your luggage.
Agreed. There's definitely a time and a place for identity, security, etc. For example, online banking is one of them. I'm all for a new Internet that provides the capability on a per connection basis to choose an end-to-end security that guarantees identity, etc. Notice the key words in bold here. As long as there are multiple tiers of security, I'm happy. If the requirement is that all traffic be identifiable as coming from a unique individual, the Internet ceases to be the last gasp of freedom under a tyrannical government regime, and that would be an unfortunate step backwards.
Given that something like 60% of the strep acquired in hospitals is MRSA, it is inevitable that it will spread beyond the hospital setting. All it takes is a doctor getting a little bit of the bacteria on his clothes, sitting down at a restaurant, followed by a kid sitting in the same seat an hour later and picking his nose.
My point is that this is not the same thing as MRSA appearing spontaneously in the general population merely because somebody took antibiotics. I'm not saying it doesn't happen, but it would be an exceptionally unusual situation.
I would say that C. diff problems are worse/more likely because of antibiotics, but there is always the possibility that conditions in your gut could change and allow it to get out of control even without antibiotics. For example, an infection of bacteriophages could kill off the E. coli in your gut and cause a C. diff bloom.
From what I've read, it sounds like iPhone only supports 850, maybe 1700, and 1900 for 3G. That's why it doesn't support 3G on T-Mobile when unlocked---no support for 2100. Unless it really does and none of the unlockers are smart enough to figure out how to create a proper carrier definition file, of course.:-)
The reason for this, to some extent, is that an antenna is only going to be ideal for a narrow range of frequencies. If you build something that's a full wave at 850, it's a half wave at 1700, but it doesn't do well at 1900 at all. So you might, for example, use an antenna whose length is between the 850 and 900 bands so that it's so-so at 850 and 900, so-so at 1700 and 1800. I don't know what you do when you start throwing in frequencies like 1900 and 2100. Maybe a separate antenna for each, which may be why there aren't any 6-band phones out there on the market, AFAIK.
Okay, maybe one in a million or even a billion. That wasn't and attempt at an estimate.:-) The point was that with the exception of certain types of resistance that spontaneously occur triggered by the antibiotic, some small amount of those bacteria would still exist even if antibiotics were not in common use, and even if it's a resistance that spontaneously occurs, bacteria with the propensity for those sudden changes would still exist.
What makes MRSA and C. diff problematic is that pretty much everybody has some resistant bacteria in their system. Maybe not MRSA, but for sure C diff is in most people's intestines. It only becomes a problem when you wipe out the other bacteria in your gut that would normally keep it in check. The result is that outbreaks can occur spontaneously in seemingly healthy people. It only takes one person having a handful of highly resistant bacteria, and if that person gets antibiotics (say after surgery), suddenly you have an outbreak. That's the point. If you want to eliminate these things, it's not enough to limit antibiotics to serious cases. The only way is to take a bunch of cultures from the person before you prescribe antibiotics and make sure that you get the right one the first time. Unfortunately, I've never seen a doctor order a bacterial culture outside a hospital environment in about twenty years. And that is a big part of why things like MRSA are such a problem.
Having just gotten back from visiting a rehab center/nursing home in which a nasty stomach bug went through the residents and staff, I would place most of the blame on doctors and nurses coming to work sick. They're all hopelessly understaffed, so people feel like they have to come in even if they are ill. Add to that things like doctors and nurses wearing the same scrubs day after day and you have really serious problems with the hospital environment. I'm sure visitors are part of the problem, but I doubt they are a major contributor. Visitors don't generally come into contact with multiple patients. If things like MRSA are spreading from patient to patient, it is the fault of doctors and nurses, NOT visitors.
While the doctors writing out scrips for antibiotics does play a role, one of the major factors should be patient education.
Doctors prescribing antibiotics for individuals at home has likely had little impact on things like MRSA or C. diff. Those superbugs are almost nonexistent outside of hospital and nursing home environments. What this tells us is that antibiotics are overprescribed for people in hospitals and nursing homes. Why is this? Usually because people are much more likely to get a bacterial infection in those environments in the first place, people are in worse health and are thus unable to fight those infections off on their own, and thus more people legitimately need antibiotics in those environments.
The only way to truly prevent resistant strains of antibiotics is to get people out of hospitals and nursing homes and back into individual homes where they are not at such a high risk of infection. In general, the absolute worst thing you can do for your health is go into the hospital. Between the constant lights and noises, nurses coming in every two hours when you should be sleeping to check your vitals (which are the same as they were the last time the b*****ds woke you up), the shared air handling with seriously sick people, the awful food that you don't want to eat, etc., it's a wonder anybody ever escapes hospitals alive....:-D
A poor wording, admittedly, but the GP is right that even without widespread antibiotic use, MRSA would still exist. It just would not be a prevalent strain, as it would not have any advantage over all the other, non-resistent strep strains, so it would be maybe one bacterium out of every thousand instead of better than one in two. Same goes for C diff and other problematic strains. Whether that's a meaningful distinction or not is another question.
This valuable item is not in use, it is not on private property....
Let me stop you right there. You're already wrong in the second part of your basic premise. As far as the owner of a gift card or calling card is concerned, there's no account. They put money on a card, and thus as far as normal people are concerned, they perceive that the card has a certain dollar value. That card is in their possession on private property. Therefore these laws cannot legitimately be enforced against such monetary instruments. Allowing the government to confiscate money that backs these cards is no different than allowing them to confiscate the value behind an unused paper gift certificate, the stock behind a stock certificate, etc. It's completely absurd.
Further, to the owner's knowledge, there is no account number at a bank associated with it (despite the fact that we geeks know that it is basically implemented that way behind the scenes). This means that usually the owner cannot get cash out of these cards. Worse, the cards are generally anonymous, which means that there is no legal means for the owner to be notified about the government absconding with those funds or to reclaim them after the government takes them. In effect, this should be an illegal money grab.
On the flip side, those unclaimed property laws are the only recourse states have for preventing abusive practices like service fees on gift cards, expiration dates, etc. So in states where they are excluded from those laws, the public can still get screwed, just by the businesses instead of the government. What we need is an unambiguous federal statute that unifies the law on this matter, requiring that companies declare it as income only when the card is actually used (not exempting them from the unclaimed property law). It should also require that the card be maintained on the books indefinitely. It should require that these debts be repaid fully ahead of all other creditors in the event of bankruptcy. It should require that these funds be kept in a separate account and should prohibit any transactions to or from that account except for the transfer of funds related to the sale of or use of these cards. In short, we need real consumer protection laws instead of the hodgepodge of hacked together state laws we have now.
You can make a backup of the files in a shadow copy, thus ensuring that your backup is a self-consistent snapshot of the filesystem at a particular point in time, but AFAIK it is not a backup in and of itself.
Sure, I know that the PPC CPU is going to run a lot better than an x86 one running at 533 Mhz
This CPU was a state-of-the-art embedded PowerPC design back in 1999, and AFAIK has only been speed bumped since then. I'm pretty sure it would get trounced by a Core i7 at the same clock speed even if you tied all but one of the i7's cores behind its back. We're not talking about a 970 or some other modern PowerPC core here. We're talking about a Book E embedded part. Based on the numbers I've seen, I'd expect it to be somewhere between a third and half the speed of a single Core i7 core running at the same clock speed (if you can even clock a Core i7 that slowly).
They're not even close to the same thing. For one thing, if your hard drive crashes, you can restore from a Time Machine backup drive, but your System Restore checkpoint was destroyed along with the rest of your data. For another, because SR uses the same disk, it is very limited in terms of how far back the backups go.
Yes, the concept of rolling back to a previous version is the same, but then again, the concept of checkpoints/snapshots/restore points has been around for at least a couple of decades in the database world. The way that these tools provide that functionality is pretty radically different.
So pretty much like all the other textbooks. Except that you misunderstand the purpose of the errors. It's not so they can charge for support. It's so they can do eight new editions, one every 2-3 years, each with lots of corrections and different page and chapter numbers in an attempt to make the used book market worthless.
Slashdot Mirror
Nah. You'd need at least JavaScript and CSS3 (which in practice probably means an HTML-4-compliant browser) to do the transitions and stuff.
I would think it would be obvious why they put contacts on rabbits. They tried it on cats, but they gave up after they had to amputate a scientist's arm from the claw damage.
We have major tsunamis somewhere on Earth at least every few decades. It seems to me that the odds are slim that something similar to this (the destruction of everyone a person knows) did not happen at least once in the history of the planet. The stories may have the same origin or may simply have been copied from one another. Hard to say. Either way, there's a good chance that there is a true story at its core, albeit probably a much older story than any of the tellings that are known to still exist today.
Bombs in luggage are much more likely to be detected. Among other things, they have to pass nitrate sniffers, X-ray scans (that electronically highlight stuff with the same density as known explosives), etc. And they have to have a trigger mechanism, which means an electronics package inside that is likely to get close scrutiny, particularly if it has wires going out to other parts of your luggage.... Actual bombs aren't nearly as hard to detect as manually-triggered explosive substances on someone's person.
The question I was replying to asked why they didn't just put a bomb in luggage and then not board.
Simple. If you don't board, they pull your luggage.
Ah. Forgot to mention that part. The federal statute should ban all fees against any declining balance cards.
Agreed. There's definitely a time and a place for identity, security, etc. For example, online banking is one of them. I'm all for a new Internet that provides the capability on a per connection basis to choose an end-to-end security that guarantees identity, etc. Notice the key words in bold here. As long as there are multiple tiers of security, I'm happy. If the requirement is that all traffic be identifiable as coming from a unique individual, the Internet ceases to be the last gasp of freedom under a tyrannical government regime, and that would be an unfortunate step backwards.
We'd just invade. And blame the Martians as the biggest threat to our nation's security....
D'oh. I always get those two mixed up.
Given that something like 60% of the strep acquired in hospitals is MRSA, it is inevitable that it will spread beyond the hospital setting. All it takes is a doctor getting a little bit of the bacteria on his clothes, sitting down at a restaurant, followed by a kid sitting in the same seat an hour later and picking his nose.
My point is that this is not the same thing as MRSA appearing spontaneously in the general population merely because somebody took antibiotics. I'm not saying it doesn't happen, but it would be an exceptionally unusual situation.
I'm not positive, but I'm pretty sure we'll run out of IP addresses on December 21, 2012. :-)
Ah. It was the other way around. My bad.
I would say that C. diff problems are worse/more likely because of antibiotics, but there is always the possibility that conditions in your gut could change and allow it to get out of control even without antibiotics. For example, an infection of bacteriophages could kill off the E. coli in your gut and cause a C. diff bloom.
From what I've read, it sounds like iPhone only supports 850, maybe 1700, and 1900 for 3G. That's why it doesn't support 3G on T-Mobile when unlocked---no support for 2100. Unless it really does and none of the unlockers are smart enough to figure out how to create a proper carrier definition file, of course. :-)
The reason for this, to some extent, is that an antenna is only going to be ideal for a narrow range of frequencies. If you build something that's a full wave at 850, it's a half wave at 1700, but it doesn't do well at 1900 at all. So you might, for example, use an antenna whose length is between the 850 and 900 bands so that it's so-so at 850 and 900, so-so at 1700 and 1800. I don't know what you do when you start throwing in frequencies like 1900 and 2100. Maybe a separate antenna for each, which may be why there aren't any 6-band phones out there on the market, AFAIK.
Okay, maybe one in a million or even a billion. That wasn't and attempt at an estimate. :-) The point was that with the exception of certain types of resistance that spontaneously occur triggered by the antibiotic, some small amount of those bacteria would still exist even if antibiotics were not in common use, and even if it's a resistance that spontaneously occurs, bacteria with the propensity for those sudden changes would still exist.
What makes MRSA and C. diff problematic is that pretty much everybody has some resistant bacteria in their system. Maybe not MRSA, but for sure C diff is in most people's intestines. It only becomes a problem when you wipe out the other bacteria in your gut that would normally keep it in check. The result is that outbreaks can occur spontaneously in seemingly healthy people. It only takes one person having a handful of highly resistant bacteria, and if that person gets antibiotics (say after surgery), suddenly you have an outbreak. That's the point. If you want to eliminate these things, it's not enough to limit antibiotics to serious cases. The only way is to take a bunch of cultures from the person before you prescribe antibiotics and make sure that you get the right one the first time. Unfortunately, I've never seen a doctor order a bacterial culture outside a hospital environment in about twenty years. And that is a big part of why things like MRSA are such a problem.
Like I said, if they existed but were not prescribed.
Having just gotten back from visiting a rehab center/nursing home in which a nasty stomach bug went through the residents and staff, I would place most of the blame on doctors and nurses coming to work sick. They're all hopelessly understaffed, so people feel like they have to come in even if they are ill. Add to that things like doctors and nurses wearing the same scrubs day after day and you have really serious problems with the hospital environment. I'm sure visitors are part of the problem, but I doubt they are a major contributor. Visitors don't generally come into contact with multiple patients. If things like MRSA are spreading from patient to patient, it is the fault of doctors and nurses, NOT visitors.
Doctors prescribing antibiotics for individuals at home has likely had little impact on things like MRSA or C. diff. Those superbugs are almost nonexistent outside of hospital and nursing home environments. What this tells us is that antibiotics are overprescribed for people in hospitals and nursing homes. Why is this? Usually because people are much more likely to get a bacterial infection in those environments in the first place, people are in worse health and are thus unable to fight those infections off on their own, and thus more people legitimately need antibiotics in those environments.
The only way to truly prevent resistant strains of antibiotics is to get people out of hospitals and nursing homes and back into individual homes where they are not at such a high risk of infection. In general, the absolute worst thing you can do for your health is go into the hospital. Between the constant lights and noises, nurses coming in every two hours when you should be sleeping to check your vitals (which are the same as they were the last time the b*****ds woke you up), the shared air handling with seriously sick people, the awful food that you don't want to eat, etc., it's a wonder anybody ever escapes hospitals alive.... :-D
A poor wording, admittedly, but the GP is right that even without widespread antibiotic use, MRSA would still exist. It just would not be a prevalent strain, as it would not have any advantage over all the other, non-resistent strep strains, so it would be maybe one bacterium out of every thousand instead of better than one in two. Same goes for C diff and other problematic strains. Whether that's a meaningful distinction or not is another question.
Let me stop you right there. You're already wrong in the second part of your basic premise. As far as the owner of a gift card or calling card is concerned, there's no account. They put money on a card, and thus as far as normal people are concerned, they perceive that the card has a certain dollar value. That card is in their possession on private property. Therefore these laws cannot legitimately be enforced against such monetary instruments. Allowing the government to confiscate money that backs these cards is no different than allowing them to confiscate the value behind an unused paper gift certificate, the stock behind a stock certificate, etc. It's completely absurd.
Further, to the owner's knowledge, there is no account number at a bank associated with it (despite the fact that we geeks know that it is basically implemented that way behind the scenes). This means that usually the owner cannot get cash out of these cards. Worse, the cards are generally anonymous, which means that there is no legal means for the owner to be notified about the government absconding with those funds or to reclaim them after the government takes them. In effect, this should be an illegal money grab.
On the flip side, those unclaimed property laws are the only recourse states have for preventing abusive practices like service fees on gift cards, expiration dates, etc. So in states where they are excluded from those laws, the public can still get screwed, just by the businesses instead of the government. What we need is an unambiguous federal statute that unifies the law on this matter, requiring that companies declare it as income only when the card is actually used (not exempting them from the unclaimed property law). It should also require that the card be maintained on the books indefinitely. It should require that these debts be repaid fully ahead of all other creditors in the event of bankruptcy. It should require that these funds be kept in a separate account and should prohibit any transactions to or from that account except for the transfer of funds related to the sale of or use of these cards. In short, we need real consumer protection laws instead of the hodgepodge of hacked together state laws we have now.
You can make a backup of the files in a shadow copy, thus ensuring that your backup is a self-consistent snapshot of the filesystem at a particular point in time, but AFAIK it is not a backup in and of itself.
This CPU was a state-of-the-art embedded PowerPC design back in 1999, and AFAIK has only been speed bumped since then. I'm pretty sure it would get trounced by a Core i7 at the same clock speed even if you tied all but one of the i7's cores behind its back. We're not talking about a 970 or some other modern PowerPC core here. We're talking about a Book E embedded part. Based on the numbers I've seen, I'd expect it to be somewhere between a third and half the speed of a single Core i7 core running at the same clock speed (if you can even clock a Core i7 that slowly).
They're not even close to the same thing. For one thing, if your hard drive crashes, you can restore from a Time Machine backup drive, but your System Restore checkpoint was destroyed along with the rest of your data. For another, because SR uses the same disk, it is very limited in terms of how far back the backups go.
Yes, the concept of rolling back to a previous version is the same, but then again, the concept of checkpoints/snapshots/restore points has been around for at least a couple of decades in the database world. The way that these tools provide that functionality is pretty radically different.
So pretty much like all the other textbooks. Except that you misunderstand the purpose of the errors. It's not so they can charge for support. It's so they can do eight new editions, one every 2-3 years, each with lots of corrections and different page and chapter numbers in an attempt to make the used book market worthless.