Maybe even ditch the whole assembly and go with LED bulbs that replace the fluorescent tubes?
People argue about LED lighting and if 120 Hz is a headache inducer compared to 150 Hz. However, I'll take either over the 60Hz ballasts of old.
What ballasts ever drove lamps at 60hz? The AC is 60hz because it has a V+ peak and a V- peak, but light bulbs dont suck light back in when applied negative voltage, they put light out just like positive voltage so you end up with two pulses of light per AC cycle.
The screen refresh rate of the LCD pixels is not the same as the LED backlight refresh rate. The LCD refresh rate is more analagous to the refresh rate of an analogue monitor, and like phosphors, it does take some picoseconds for an LCD cell to fade once it's power is ceased, so you get the "smoothing" of the images in the same fashion.
The LED refresh rate, on the other hand, has to do entirely with the light behind the LCDs. Whether those shut off immediately or not I don't know, but I've certainly never had a problem and I'm very sensitive to refresh rates (they trigger migraines when too low.)
Switching to an older style monitor that doesn't use LED backlighting would resolve the problem for the original poster. Cranking up the refresh rates on the LEDs would induce more flickering, not less, because they don't have a decay/shutdown period according to them.
Turning up the duty cycle in a PWM setup reduces the "off" time to the point where they are "off" so little (maybe even not off at all) that they will just be running on straight DC and therefore not flickering at all.
Like you I get headaches from looking at CRT screens. I could never stand refresh rates below 80 Hz. The problem is I need a lot of screen real estate and usually the lower end monitors can only do higher resolution at lower refresh rates. Interlace mode is even worse.
So when LED came out I rejoiced. It is a God send for me. I never needed glasses until I was diagnosed with astigmatism. I work exclusively with computers and blame CRT monitors until now.
So while I am bothered by the flicker on LED monitors, I am also thankful for it being a huge improvement over its predecessor.
Did you not buy any monitors between CRT designs and LED backlit designs? And more to the point, have you tried eye drops?
No fluorescent bulbs refresh at 60Hz. The ballast on most fluorescent bulbs tends to run in the 10 to 40kHz range. The only bulbs that refresh at line frequency are incandescent, but the resistive load of the filaments tends to level that flicker out a bit. But lets not let facts get involved with a good story.
Not to mention, 60hz AC has two peaks per cycle, one positive and one negative. So a bulb (incandescent or old fluorescent non-electronic ballasts which are still in use in a lot of buildings) using this as a power source directly (and not cutting off half of the wave for some reason) will flash twice per cycle, leading to 120hz operation.
If a lot of people that started a search with "prescription drugs online" were searching for "prescription drugs online unicorns riding gorillas wearing purple napkin trampoline" then that is what autocomplete would suggest. Bloody hell, it's not like someone at Google is manually creating "suggestions" for people...
Not to mention, there are two features offered by Google: autocomplete (changing the search you are typing without you taking any additional action) is totally different than live suggested search (a list of searches that start the same way that you must choose in order to execute). Autocomplete uses only past searches or dictionary information, not a magic cloud algorithm that can be bent to the will of our overlords.
This is NOT about autocomplete, as autocomplete will NOT change your search for "prescription drugs" to "prescription drugs for free from a crack dealer" plain and simple, unless you searched for that exact phrase in the past. This is about suggested search, which is just a collection of things other people have searched for. Hilariously, "prescription drugs online without prescription" is not there for most users, so did he search for that in the past and have google "remember" it for him?
I must be one of these morons. It often happens to me that Google Chrome address-bar (omnibar) throws in the auto-completion just when I'm about to press the enter. Then after looking at results for a while I find out the stuff I typed is appended with crap.
Now that I bothered to write about my stupidity, I'm considering turning the auto-completion off from address-bar.
The chrome address bar autocomplete only fills in more than you type in two cases; if you are typing part of a word that will get turned into a "We think you mean to search for X" anyway, or a search you have already executed that started with the same text. An off-the-cuff search won't use the live suggested search results to autocomplete your search.
I guess Attorneys have so much work that First Amendment Issues are a nuisance?
And while we're on the subject of Attorney's. Given; if client A is in conference with attorney B, and person C comes into the discussion to talk with client A about how to commit an act of fraud. Question; Does the conversation between client A and person C in front of attorney B fall under the "Attorney–client privilege?"
You forgot to add "asking for a friend" to your question...
The standards don't *require* you to cache anything.
But if web browsers were to routinely do the equivalent of a Shift+reload every time the user switches away from and back to a browser tab because there is no cache, web server operators would likely be up in arms over bandwidth "abuse". They'd end up putting in a module to provide an intentionally low-bandwidth experience to users that don't cache, identified by their user agent or by a session cookie.
Ding ding ding! What has happened is the unintended consequence of sites using SSL as a blanket instead of a pinpoint. It used to be that the burden of encryption was only placed on the most sensitive of data, like a banking session or a protected site log-in, so caching it was de facto a bad idea since the user isnt likely to visit those specific pages often, and is never likely to want to see what was there the last time they visited. Now, with CPU cycles so cheap that we might as well encrypt everything (and with more users wanting to see "https://" everywhere they go), using SSL as a signal of pages unworthy of caching is not practical. What should have been done "the right way" in the web sites AND browsers of yore was ignored due to the browsers preferring a non-universal way of handling cache, relieving web sites of the need, and has been undone by websites that dont have the need (encrypting your google searches? come on, they are spying on you anyway) leaving us all in the uncomfortable position of realizing that what was a good idea YEARS ago is still not followed very closely.
Hell, you can support multiple API levels at once.
Tell everyone that they can pick their choice of screen size from 3" to 6" (and beyond) and pick exactly how crazy they want the widgets to be, and nobody bats an eye
Tell them that they can play Angry Birds 1, 2, 3, 4, but not Angry Birds 4.5, and everyone loses their mind!
Mark Shuttleworth writes about their first meeting: "We mapped out our approach to the key question I’ve been asked by every carrier we’ve met so far: how can we accommodate differentiation, without fragmenting the platform for developers?"
To which he added "Fragmentation or lack of differentiation, please pick one and we can move on."
I though the woman that accused him of rape, after the wikileaks thing blew up, was a known CIA operative. The theory being that if they could get him pinned down by the local authorities on other charges, it could be used as leverage.
Yep, just googled it, and she was CIA.
If she was with the CIA, wouldn't Assange have known about it? I mean he had all their communiques right?
> if Verizon catches wind of your rooting, you'll be dropped like a call on Sprint and be out the cash you spent on both devices.
No you won't. Verizon might be evil control freaks, but not even THEY will terminate you just for rooting your phone.
That said, be aware that your likelihood of getting any phone not sold by Verizon to ever be fully-functional (especially EVDO and LTE), on Verizon is close to 'nonexistent'. People have occasionally found ways to reflash Sprint identical twins of Verizon phones with Verizon radio modems, but if you ever got a completely "alien" non-Verizon CDMA phone to do full-speed EVDO on Verizon, it would make headlines over at xda-developers.com. Radio modems are an entirely different beast from Android phones (which contain radio modems, but interact with them at arm's length).
He wasn't suggesting simply rooting (something many many people have done without incident) but instead, rooting with the purpose of switching the IMEI and other low-level data on the handset to trick it into looking like a different phone on the network. This is something that network providers (as they should) take very seriously and will not hesitate to blacklist the offending device if they think it is anything but genuine.
Hell, if they did not delay updates by 3+ months I might even pay their insane charges. My Not A Nexus Galaxy Nexus was the straw that broke the camels back. I will be buying my phone right from the company selling them next time.
From one certified geek to another, was running CyanogenMod or a similar AOSP based firmware really out of the question if the need is there? I spent a while doing this but eventually threw in the towel after realizing that it's just not that painful to have to put up with software that is months out of date. My Galaxy S3 with standard software does everything but "photosphere", is as stable as they come, and shipped a year ago with enough cpu/ram/flash to still handle any new app.
I dislike their total ripoff practices. To keep my plan I have to pay "full price" for the next phone. Yet, I get no discount. The full price is actually more than what they retail for if not bought from verizon.
Not to mention their inability to provided/allow timely updates for non-fruit devices. My next device will not be on their network.
Sadly the only option to pay a "fair" price for your phone is with Tmobile, and as you can see in these tests, the way they give you this "Fairness" is by investing jack shit into their network. The Big 3 may be greedy, but they _are_ competing to have the fastest/widest network, just like we want them to. Now, I guess we can spend our time nitpicking the lack of choice in their contracts.
Also, it doesn't attract tax if you barter the vegetables for something else.
ho boy... just a second there, better be careful about what you think isn't taxable: "You must include in gross income in the year of receipt the fair market value of goods and services received in exchange for goods or services you provide or may provide under the bartering arrangement."
IANAA (I am not an accountant), but capital gains are only when you buy something and then sell it at a higher price.
It's a little bit more involved than that. This is only a capital gain when you actually intend to hold and/or use the assets rather than turning around and immediately selling them again. When a grocery store buys items wholesale and then sells them to its retail customers, that's not a "capital gain", it's just a retail profit. US tax code requires you to hold an asset for at least a year before selling it in order to claim the capital gains tax rate.
Eh that is a bit backwards. First, "capital gains" is any profit made on a non-inventory item; meaning something you are NOT going to keep in a warehouse or grocery store. Stocks, real estate, commodities, etc are all items you would buy/resell that fall under capital gains. Second, the capital gains tax structure is often organized such that you are incentivized to hold your investment longer, i.e. if you keep your stock investment in place for a long time you will have a lower tax liability when you realize your profit (meaning the short term capital gains tax rate is higher than the long term one) since the goal of the tax is to keep investments in place to discourage volatility.
But that takes us back to the definition of a bitcoin; is it a commodity? is it a currency? is it an imaginary number with no real relationship to the real world (much like Apple stock)? The exact definition will determine how it can be handled from a tax perspective.
Keep track of expenses (e.g., equipment, floor space rental, electricity consumption) that serve as the investment for the BitCoin mining. This comes off the bottom-line profit. Otherwise, you would pay 'income' taxes on your 'outflow'.
In 99 cases out of 100 these days, you will be in the negative anyway. Bitcoin mining is dead to anyone not participating in the multi-thousand dollar ASIC race to the bottom. And to those that are, may god have pity on their souls. The IRS would only get any real returns by going after miners from 2010, and those guys have no doubt disposed of all of the records and the profits.
"CThe Top500 is FAR from a comprehensive list of supercomputers, but twice a year we see a flurry of stories presuming that it is.
Can you cite a better list?
We could just list off sites drawing the most power, and probably stand a better chance at pegging most of the private/secret data centers used for supercomputing. The very nature of what they are doing really defies attempts to list, because the power of a system that big exists in more dimensions than the *FLOPS that the almighty Linpack measures. I have nothing against the orgs on the Top500 list or even Top500 itself, but to anyone interested in such things, Top500 is *not* all-encompassing and you would do well to understand what else is out there (on a project by project basis).
"Of interest"??? How about boosting the stock price of Intel significantly...
"Tianhe-2 (also known as the Milky Way-2) consists of 16 000 nodes. Inside each node, two Intel Xeon IvyBridge processors and three Xeon Phi processors run the show, adding up to a total of 3.12 million computing cores."
As many cores as 800,000 desktops (a rough comparison but eh) should keep them happy considering everyone is buying (non-Intel) tablets these days.
"China Bumps US Out of First Place For Fastest Supercomptuer"
Fastest supercomputer, that 1) Runs Linpack and 2) is publicly-acknowledged. There are plenty of similar supercomputers that don't meet one or both of those criteria, and are therefore omitted. The Top500 is FAR from a comprehensive list of supercomputers, but twice a year we see a flurry of stories presuming that it is.
You can hold a reasonable court without disclosing that stuff.
John Doe #1 has communicated with John Doe #2 and John Doe #3, all are suspected terrorists. We would like a warrant to monitor John Doe #1 as we already have on the other two. Here is some evidence of the other two discussing a plot to pollute our precious bodily fluids.
No sensitive data would be leaked, but it could still be audited and subject to normal perjury rules. No judge would sign warrants that failed to meet the normal burdons, unlike now since they do not need to fear any repercussions.
If you leave the part about the "plot to pollute our precious bodily fluids" in there, how exactly does that not give the would-be terrorists the exact information they need to know in order to abandon their plot, go into hiding, and start a different plot a week later?
And if you take it out, the court is just a money-wasting repeat of "John Doe 1 talked to John Doe 2 about [redacted] can we have our warrant now?" What's wrong with just waiting 50 years for all the info to be declassified? [/snark]
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe even ditch the whole assembly and go with LED bulbs that replace the fluorescent tubes?
People argue about LED lighting and if 120 Hz is a headache inducer compared to 150 Hz. However, I'll take either over the 60Hz ballasts of old.
What ballasts ever drove lamps at 60hz? The AC is 60hz because it has a V+ peak and a V- peak, but light bulbs dont suck light back in when applied negative voltage, they put light out just like positive voltage so you end up with two pulses of light per AC cycle.
The screen refresh rate of the LCD pixels is not the same as the LED backlight refresh rate. The LCD refresh rate is more analagous to the refresh rate of an analogue monitor, and like phosphors, it does take some picoseconds for an LCD cell to fade once it's power is ceased, so you get the "smoothing" of the images in the same fashion.
The LED refresh rate, on the other hand, has to do entirely with the light behind the LCDs. Whether those shut off immediately or not I don't know, but I've certainly never had a problem and I'm very sensitive to refresh rates (they trigger migraines when too low.)
Switching to an older style monitor that doesn't use LED backlighting would resolve the problem for the original poster. Cranking up the refresh rates on the LEDs would induce more flickering, not less, because they don't have a decay/shutdown period according to them.
Turning up the duty cycle in a PWM setup reduces the "off" time to the point where they are "off" so little (maybe even not off at all) that they will just be running on straight DC and therefore not flickering at all.
Like you I get headaches from looking at CRT screens. I could never stand refresh rates below 80 Hz. The problem is I need a lot of screen real estate and usually the lower end monitors can only do higher resolution at lower refresh rates. Interlace mode is even worse.
So when LED came out I rejoiced. It is a God send for me. I never needed glasses until I was diagnosed with astigmatism. I work exclusively with computers and blame CRT monitors until now.
So while I am bothered by the flicker on LED monitors, I am also thankful for it being a huge improvement over its predecessor.
Did you not buy any monitors between CRT designs and LED backlit designs? And more to the point, have you tried eye drops?
No fluorescent bulbs refresh at 60Hz. The ballast on most fluorescent bulbs tends to run in the 10 to 40kHz range. The only bulbs that refresh at line frequency are incandescent, but the resistive load of the filaments tends to level that flicker out a bit. But lets not let facts get involved with a good story.
Not to mention, 60hz AC has two peaks per cycle, one positive and one negative. So a bulb (incandescent or old fluorescent non-electronic ballasts which are still in use in a lot of buildings) using this as a power source directly (and not cutting off half of the wave for some reason) will flash twice per cycle, leading to 120hz operation.
also, is this an advert for prad?
I hope not, dass vor Ort saugt wie ein östlich Deutsch im Urlaub.
If a lot of people that started a search with "prescription drugs online" were searching for "prescription drugs online unicorns riding gorillas wearing purple napkin trampoline" then that is what autocomplete would suggest. Bloody hell, it's not like someone at Google is manually creating "suggestions" for people...
Not to mention, there are two features offered by Google: autocomplete (changing the search you are typing without you taking any additional action) is totally different than live suggested search (a list of searches that start the same way that you must choose in order to execute). Autocomplete uses only past searches or dictionary information, not a magic cloud algorithm that can be bent to the will of our overlords.
This is NOT about autocomplete, as autocomplete will NOT change your search for "prescription drugs" to "prescription drugs for free from a crack dealer" plain and simple, unless you searched for that exact phrase in the past. This is about suggested search, which is just a collection of things other people have searched for. Hilariously, "prescription drugs online without prescription" is not there for most users, so did he search for that in the past and have google "remember" it for him?
I must be one of these morons. It often happens to me that Google Chrome address-bar (omnibar) throws in the auto-completion just when I'm about to press the enter. Then after looking at results for a while I find out the stuff I typed is appended with crap.
Now that I bothered to write about my stupidity, I'm considering turning the auto-completion off from address-bar.
The chrome address bar autocomplete only fills in more than you type in two cases; if you are typing part of a word that will get turned into a "We think you mean to search for X" anyway, or a search you have already executed that started with the same text. An off-the-cuff search won't use the live suggested search results to autocomplete your search.
I guess Attorneys have so much work that First Amendment Issues are a nuisance?
And while we're on the subject of Attorney's. Given; if client A is in conference with attorney B, and person C comes into the discussion to talk with client A about how to commit an act of fraud. Question; Does the conversation between client A and person C in front of attorney B fall under the "Attorney–client privilege?"
You forgot to add "asking for a friend" to your question...
Most system files are only writable by the root user. What is the difference between `read-only' and `only writable by root' in practice?
Hm, the practice of "lets put this button in front of the user that they can click to become root!" might be part of it...
The standards don't *require* you to cache anything.
But if web browsers were to routinely do the equivalent of a Shift+reload every time the user switches away from and back to a browser tab because there is no cache, web server operators would likely be up in arms over bandwidth "abuse". They'd end up putting in a module to provide an intentionally low-bandwidth experience to users that don't cache, identified by their user agent or by a session cookie.
Ding ding ding! What has happened is the unintended consequence of sites using SSL as a blanket instead of a pinpoint. It used to be that the burden of encryption was only placed on the most sensitive of data, like a banking session or a protected site log-in, so caching it was de facto a bad idea since the user isnt likely to visit those specific pages often, and is never likely to want to see what was there the last time they visited. Now, with CPU cycles so cheap that we might as well encrypt everything (and with more users wanting to see "https://" everywhere they go), using SSL as a signal of pages unworthy of caching is not practical. What should have been done "the right way" in the web sites AND browsers of yore was ignored due to the browsers preferring a non-universal way of handling cache, relieving web sites of the need, and has been undone by websites that dont have the need (encrypting your google searches? come on, they are spying on you anyway) leaving us all in the uncomfortable position of realizing that what was a good idea YEARS ago is still not followed very closely.
99% of them were wrong.
Hell, you can support multiple API levels at once.
Tell everyone that they can pick their choice of screen size from 3" to 6" (and beyond) and pick exactly how crazy they want the widgets to be, and nobody bats an eye
Tell them that they can play Angry Birds 1, 2, 3, 4, but not Angry Birds 4.5, and everyone loses their mind!
If the differentiation is in apps and themes/skins, it can be done. If it's forks of the OS, it's fragmentation.
Tell that to anyone who has ever commented about fragmentation in Android.
Mark Shuttleworth writes about their first meeting: "We mapped out our approach to the key question I’ve been asked by every carrier we’ve met so far: how can we accommodate differentiation, without fragmenting the platform for developers?"
To which he added "Fragmentation or lack of differentiation, please pick one and we can move on."
I though the woman that accused him of rape, after the wikileaks thing blew up, was a known CIA operative. The theory being that if they could get him pinned down by the local authorities on other charges, it could be used as leverage.
Yep, just googled it, and she was CIA.
If she was with the CIA, wouldn't Assange have known about it? I mean he had all their communiques right?
> if Verizon catches wind of your rooting, you'll be dropped like a call on Sprint and be out the cash you spent on both devices.
No you won't. Verizon might be evil control freaks, but not even THEY will terminate you just for rooting your phone.
That said, be aware that your likelihood of getting any phone not sold by Verizon to ever be fully-functional (especially EVDO and LTE), on Verizon is close to 'nonexistent'. People have occasionally found ways to reflash Sprint identical twins of Verizon phones with Verizon radio modems, but if you ever got a completely "alien" non-Verizon CDMA phone to do full-speed EVDO on Verizon, it would make headlines over at xda-developers.com. Radio modems are an entirely different beast from Android phones (which contain radio modems, but interact with them at arm's length).
He wasn't suggesting simply rooting (something many many people have done without incident) but instead, rooting with the purpose of switching the IMEI and other low-level data on the handset to trick it into looking like a different phone on the network. This is something that network providers (as they should) take very seriously and will not hesitate to blacklist the offending device if they think it is anything but genuine.
Hell, if they did not delay updates by 3+ months I might even pay their insane charges. My Not A Nexus Galaxy Nexus was the straw that broke the camels back. I will be buying my phone right from the company selling them next time.
From one certified geek to another, was running CyanogenMod or a similar AOSP based firmware really out of the question if the need is there? I spent a while doing this but eventually threw in the towel after realizing that it's just not that painful to have to put up with software that is months out of date. My Galaxy S3 with standard software does everything but "photosphere", is as stable as they come, and shipped a year ago with enough cpu/ram/flash to still handle any new app.
I dislike their total ripoff practices.
To keep my plan I have to pay "full price" for the next phone. Yet, I get no discount. The full price is actually more than what they retail for if not bought from verizon.
Not to mention their inability to provided/allow timely updates for non-fruit devices. My next device will not be on their network.
Sadly the only option to pay a "fair" price for your phone is with Tmobile, and as you can see in these tests, the way they give you this "Fairness" is by investing jack shit into their network. The Big 3 may be greedy, but they _are_ competing to have the fastest/widest network, just like we want them to. Now, I guess we can spend our time nitpicking the lack of choice in their contracts.
Also, it doesn't attract tax if you barter the vegetables for something else.
ho boy... just a second there, better be careful about what you think isn't taxable: "You must include in gross income in the year of receipt the fair market value of goods and services received in exchange for goods or services you provide or may provide under the bartering arrangement."
http://www.irs.gov/taxtopics/tc420.html
It's a little bit more involved than that. This is only a capital gain when you actually intend to hold and/or use the assets rather than turning around and immediately selling them again. When a grocery store buys items wholesale and then sells them to its retail customers, that's not a "capital gain", it's just a retail profit. US tax code requires you to hold an asset for at least a year before selling it in order to claim the capital gains tax rate.
Eh that is a bit backwards. First, "capital gains" is any profit made on a non-inventory item; meaning something you are NOT going to keep in a warehouse or grocery store. Stocks, real estate, commodities, etc are all items you would buy/resell that fall under capital gains. Second, the capital gains tax structure is often organized such that you are incentivized to hold your investment longer, i.e. if you keep your stock investment in place for a long time you will have a lower tax liability when you realize your profit (meaning the short term capital gains tax rate is higher than the long term one) since the goal of the tax is to keep investments in place to discourage volatility.
But that takes us back to the definition of a bitcoin; is it a commodity? is it a currency? is it an imaginary number with no real relationship to the real world (much like Apple stock)? The exact definition will determine how it can be handled from a tax perspective.
Keep track of expenses (e.g., equipment, floor space rental, electricity consumption) that serve as the investment for the BitCoin mining. This comes off the bottom-line profit. Otherwise, you would pay 'income' taxes on your 'outflow'.
In 99 cases out of 100 these days, you will be in the negative anyway. Bitcoin mining is dead to anyone not participating in the multi-thousand dollar ASIC race to the bottom. And to those that are, may god have pity on their souls. The IRS would only get any real returns by going after miners from 2010, and those guys have no doubt disposed of all of the records and the profits.
What part of "The very nature of what they are doing really defies attempts to list" is so fucking hard to understand?
"CThe Top500 is FAR from a comprehensive list of supercomputers, but twice a year we see a flurry of stories presuming that it is.
Can you cite a better list?
We could just list off sites drawing the most power, and probably stand a better chance at pegging most of the private/secret data centers used for supercomputing. The very nature of what they are doing really defies attempts to list, because the power of a system that big exists in more dimensions than the *FLOPS that the almighty Linpack measures. I have nothing against the orgs on the Top500 list or even Top500 itself, but to anyone interested in such things, Top500 is *not* all-encompassing and you would do well to understand what else is out there (on a project by project basis).
"Of interest"??? How about boosting the stock price of Intel significantly...
"Tianhe-2 (also known as the Milky Way-2) consists of 16 000 nodes. Inside each node, two Intel Xeon IvyBridge processors and three Xeon Phi processors run the show, adding up to a total of 3.12 million computing cores."
As many cores as 800,000 desktops (a rough comparison but eh) should keep them happy considering everyone is buying (non-Intel) tablets these days.
"China Bumps US Out of First Place For Fastest Supercomptuer"
Fastest supercomputer, that 1) Runs Linpack and 2) is publicly-acknowledged. There are plenty of similar supercomputers that don't meet one or both of those criteria, and are therefore omitted. The Top500 is FAR from a comprehensive list of supercomputers, but twice a year we see a flurry of stories presuming that it is.
I never disagreed with either of those.
You can hold a reasonable court without disclosing that stuff.
John Doe #1 has communicated with John Doe #2 and John Doe #3, all are suspected terrorists. We would like a warrant to monitor John Doe #1 as we already have on the other two. Here is some evidence of the other two discussing a plot to pollute our precious bodily fluids.
No sensitive data would be leaked, but it could still be audited and subject to normal perjury rules. No judge would sign warrants that failed to meet the normal burdons, unlike now since they do not need to fear any repercussions.
If you leave the part about the "plot to pollute our precious bodily fluids" in there, how exactly does that not give the would-be terrorists the exact information they need to know in order to abandon their plot, go into hiding, and start a different plot a week later?
And if you take it out, the court is just a money-wasting repeat of "John Doe 1 talked to John Doe 2 about [redacted] can we have our warrant now?" What's wrong with just waiting 50 years for all the info to be declassified? [/snark]