What we "observe" is the filtered subjective experience our eyeballs relay to our brains, caused by the effects photons have on the electron valence configurations of certain molecules, and they retina's primary processing of those changes.
We do not actually "See" photons. We see the effects of photons, in every case.
What if the observable effect is so subtle and small, that it cannot be seperated from experimental error, except at HUGE cosmological scales?
If so, how would you define something like the observed "Dark flow"?
EG-- If no fundemental cause for the dark flow can be determined (As is currently the case), how do you KNOW that it is NOT being caused by a weakly interacting force originating from outside of our universe, that is normally too small to be detected, except over exceedingly large collections of objects?
An interesting conjecture. It would be applicable to any God that is presumed to have created true free will.
However, the christian God has not done so, and does not claim to do so. On the contrary, the christian bible preaches predesintation, which is the antithesis of free will. If anything, this implies a purely deterministic nature to our universe, our own natures imcluded, otherwise God would not be able to be omnicient, and could not make claims like "I am" as in the cryptic hebrew phrase originally used, (It basically means "I am" in all possible tenses; past present and future.) nor could he claim that he "IS" the God of abraham (as in, right now.) even after abraham is long decomposed. It implies that the christian god exists outside of normal time, and to whom the universe as we perceive it is purely deterministic, and basically static.
The "Chinese room" argument would seem applicable in this case; We "intelligent" beings are fundementally incapable of true understanding, since we simply operate with a highly complex, and ultimately predictable (requirement of full determinism) set of programs, that as a matter of happenstance, seem to give reasonable replies, without actually understanding. (Essentially, the neurons in your brain do not actually understand anything-- they simply react programatically to stimulation from sensory organs. They create chains of self-referential outputs that reinforce certain outcomes, again, based on programatically derived behaviors and sensory input. Given sufficient complexity to the system, the illusion of understanding is achieved, without actually achieving it.)
The deterministic nature of humans can be externally supported through a series of simple observations:
A human baby will develop into what appears to be a thinking adult human being, barring a physiological or programmatical anomaly. (Downs syndrome etc for the former-- being raised by wild bears, etc, for the latter.) It does this every time.
If choice was as fundemental as humans like to claim it to be, then children would exhibit wildly divergent outcomes-- "I like dogs better-- I will behave like a dog instead" etc. Some might argue that this is already the case (furries, theianthropism, etc...) but empirical data shows this to be highly exceptional, and more in line with a programatical anomaly, rather than an innate feature. If it were an innate feature, you would have packs of humans running around howling at the moon as a regular occurance, as well as all manner of other "non-human" behaviorisms normally exhibited by "feral children" (children raised outside human companionship before the age of 5). The reason is because the infant human would have made decisions about how it wanted to behave intrinsically, rather than learning through pre-programmed directives for observation and mimicry. Thus, the baby would choose to ignore its parents, and do its own thing. This is contrary to observable human infant behavior, which is highly predictable, and strongly favors determinism.
Children develop the primary "kernel" of social behavior and linguistic capacity within this critical first 5 years of early life. Without that stimulation, they do not grow up to be "people" like you typically understand it. They struggle to even speak, have difficulty with language period, and are unable to grasp societal boundaries and mores. (There is a famous case of a feral child found in rural france shortly after the industrial revolution that is highly illuminating. It is reinforced by other feral child studies. Due to the obvious ethics issues involved, research into feral children is limited to natural occurances of the phenomenon, which is far from commonplace. All the data available though suggests that early socialization is essential to normal human function in adult life.) They basically act like animals.
I suppose a pedant would claim this is not proof of determinism, since the baby does not automatically grow up to behave like a human, even when raised outside of human i
There is also the issue of "quality" of said jobs.
Which is better: Keeping one high-paid engineer, or creating two food services jobs?
In terms of raw metrics, the two food services jobs win, because you lost one job, and produced 2. Thats a net gain of one job,
However, you you break down the effect, losing the highly paid job to create two low paid jobs does more to hurt the economy than does retaining the high paid job. EG-- Person gets paid 30$ an hour. Two min-wage food services people each get paid 7$ an hour. that is 50% less currency changing hands, even though the number of jobs went up 100%.
That's the major issue I have with the "I'll help create jobs!" rhetoric I hear from politicians; what kind of jobs? Will they actually pay for more than just the gas to drive to work, and if you skimp on food and live off the fast food you make at work-- possibly the rent?
For what it's worth, I agree that the questions on that survey were loaded. However, Fox news is hardly what I would choose as my primary source of news coverage. I would be more apt to follow an unfiltered aggregation of international twitter feeds, and I fucking hate twitter.
I can understand that-- (I have read the linked article now, btw. I posted in true slashdot tradition by not reading it first.)
But I would follow up your post a little-- I don't know about Australia, but in the US we also have these 'nosebleed section' areas that the local politicians call "free speech zones." The fact that these even exist at all speaks contrary to the "No, the current enforcement is good and wholesome, if you would just file the paperwork on time!" rhetoric.
Like all galvanized media events, I would say the truth lies somewhere in the middle.
People in positions of authority, more often than not, got there because they have skills at manipulating people, and asserting control. NOT because they have some innate understanding of what they are actually in control over, or some special vocational talent other than essentially bullying and mind control techniques. (No, not the tinfoil hat kind-- the 'guilt trip, and glowing smile charisma' kind.)
As such, when the reality of the complete absence of a foundation for that authority is exposed, tight-fisted clampdowns happen.
A good example: Sobriety laws during prohibition. People flaunted the sobriety laws, "Authority figures" in government clamped down to maintain their authority in that matter-- ultimately lost.
This time we have Wikileaks and individuals in areas with sensitive data releasing said data to the public (Flaunting the "Secrets" rules and laws), and the authority figures impacted are clamping down, predicably, because they have no real power to exercise other than their ability to manipulate the opinions of other people.
This is precisely why the Mainstream media is performing rampant character assasination against Wikileaks, why the government is stamping its little feet in a tantrum and blocking sites en-mass, and why senators are calling for blood.
The power of our government stems from the strength of our military. (Because our government has become tyrranical. It keeps secrets from the public because it does not trust the public. It needs the muscle of the military and local police to enforce its will on the public. The second amendment was meant to prevent this, by keeping the government healthfully wary of trying this, but has successfully neutered the public's ability to revolt, and so now just relies on military power to maintain order. The intended design of our government was to be the inverse, where voting is a proxy for offing the government with violence; and where that is rendered impossible, to have the second amendment to fall back on to do the housekeeping when/if it becomes necessary.)
When the military [rather, the people in it] realises or is made aware of the abuses it is being made an accomplice to, (A-la manning) it may react contrary to the designs of those in authority, circumventing that authority. When that happens, the sword the government uses to exert its will starts to cut the other way. Naturally, they don't want that. Being exposed as impotent usurpers doing dirty, one-sided dealings is one of their greatest fears. The incompetent and decietful are always afraid of being found out. ("And I would have gotten away with it too, if it weren't for those meddling kids!" etc.)
As such, the people in authority in this situation have decided that the solution is *NOT* to change policy so that the military will no longer have incentive to disobey and go maverick on them when such information comes out, but instead to make the individual people in the military as ignorant of the big picture as possible, so that they can continue to abuse the power the military provides them, while minimising the risks of creating another Manning.
As such, I would expect the government to be enacting the following damage control:
1) Discredit the leaker as much as possible, and make an example of them. (Check!) 2) Discredit the organisation(s) that fascilitated the leaks, and blacklist them (Check!) 3) Distract attention away from security leaks as much as possible in the media, and focus on how the government is making people "safer." (TSA--Check, Murdock and pals demonize freed information and informants-- check, Government releases press releases about improved security as nebulously as possible- check.) 4) Compartmentalize all information sources, and enact strong-arm measures against government employees. Emphasize that all employees are being constantly monitored and will be sent to android hell at the first act of defiance. (Check.) 5) Create new laws premitting the government to harshly d
While I am most certainly NOT a proponent of the "political correctness" intellectual plague, Racism serves no legitimate purpose and serves only to highlight the ignorance and repulsiveness of the person who practices it.
That said, the word "nigger" has at least 3 definitions in most dictionaries. It is quite possible to have $Ethnic 'niggers', where $Ethnic can equal "white", if you use the second or third definition. It is therefor not explicitly referring to darkly colored people in a racially pejorative manner. (Much like saying "Red Neck" does not explicitly imply that the target of the slur is white. It implies a specific behavior instead.)
2. Slang: Extremely Disparaging and Offensive . a person of any race or origin regarded as contemptible, inferior, ignorant, etc. 3. a victim of prejudice similar to that suffered by blacks; a person who is economically, politically, or socially disenfranchised.
Ergo, the anonymous coward that continually spews racial epithets is a filthy fucking nigger himself, and should take a good long look in the mirror. (assuming the intense amount of niggery badness being reflected is not too much for the mirror to withstand without spontaneously shattering, of course. That particular AC is exceptionally base.)
Now-- This information in hand, the GGP who said that the EPA fucktards who let this shit through knowingly are niggers-- would appear to be using the word properly with the second dictionary term, despite such use being in epically bad taste due to the commonly associated implication of the racially bigoted first definition (A condition at least partially maintained by the knee-jerk reactions of people when it is used, preventing it migrating to a race neutral word). In such circumstances, the poster would do well to qualify beforehand exactly how they are using that word, because it is a buzzword for certain demographics. (In all areas in which a word can be used as a buzzword. Some use it wrecklessly, some consider it universally racist, some pick it up as their "cause" to abolish the use of, etc.)
Personally, I only use this word when the situation is not only "Extremely bad", but "So bad it couldn't possibly get any worse", and then only as the second term listed above, as describing people. EG-- Bigots are fucking niggers.
Personally, I'd be surprised at the discovery of an ad serving network that DIDN'T serve malware on the side.
I have never understood why advert networks allow their "Partners" to cross-load javascript, and other scripted media objects. If the advert requires a "phone home" script, then it should have that script hosted, and vetted by the advert network they are partnered with, rather than playing a shell game of spot the malware.
Any advert that tries to hot-load a javascript or other scripted media object should be immediately rejected. (it should be pretty trivial to catch such hot-loading attempts with a submission filter, same with loading PDFs, etc. Likewise the use of obfuscated javascript techniques should auto reject.)
There really is no reason for this, other than that the ad networks themselves dont trust EACH OTHER. (EG, they dont want their partners to get their 'oh so important' metrics data instead of them-- or rather, they want to get that data directly themselves, and dont trust their partners to give it to them quickly enough, or accurately. [the potential for the ad-host to screw over the ad-producer over faulty serving metrics would be outstanding if the ad producer had to rely on metrics recorded exclusively by the ad-host, but fuck them.])
Internet advertising is one of the few things about the modern internet that could actually stand to have a little multinational regulation imposed on it. (And then, purely technical regulations intended to greatly frustrate malware distribution, and nothing else.)
Most likely the progenitor cells that are in the main body of the testis. It is likely that a simple biopsy would be sufficient to harvest these progenitor cells.
In male vertibrates the testes are comprised of vascular tissues that feed a labyrinth of micro-tubule structures, which then connect to the upper portion of the epididymis. Inside these tubules there are colonies of spermatogenic progenitor cells, which divide once via mitosis, then divide a second time into early, non-motile sperm cells via meiosis. These non-motile, and immature sperm cells migrate through this network of microtubules into the epididymis where additional external factors and hormonal secretions initiate many of the morphological changes in sperm cells. They then pass into the lower portion of the epididymis where they are stored prior to ejaculation.
I hope that this answers your question.
If you are worried that they would confiscate your whole testicle, I would say that your worries are unfounded. These progenitor cells are highly copious in quantity inside your testes, and a simple needle biopsy would most certainly be sufficient.
G-code allows actual circles and arcs to be defined using a radius, a starting point, and a direction.
While not true NURBS, since there is no spline operation that I am aware of, making use of these operations will increase the efficiency of your toolpath considerably. Interpolating point locations creates a rough finish inside cylinder walls, etc.
Granted, most people do not make optimal tool paths, and some post processors mangle arc and circle directives and generate discrete point-point operations from them internally anyway, (usually on craptastical machines anyway), but that does not mean that G-code is strictly point-point operations.
Most 3-axis parts are "prismatic solids." While you are correct that this is really 2.5 axis, you actively use the Z axis for some operations, such as helical milling. (This is the more optimal method of cutting out a cylendrical opening with an end mill, because it keeps the cutter engaged at full chip load consistently.)
When cutting a complex surface with an end-mill, you will find that you cannot produce a smooth contoured 3D pocket bottom with a 3-axis unit. This is because the tip of the mill must be fully engaged to avoid chatter, damage to the spindle, and avoid destroying the end-mill itself. The variable chipload you would create would destroy the flutes of the cutter very quickly. (Basically, the variable load breaks off the edges of the flutes near the tip, which unbalances the cutter, which damages the spindle.) If you use a ballnose end mill to try to overcome this problem, you will have problems with scallops.
A 4-axis mill can do surface profiling of the sort you have in mind, by angling the cutter and maintaining tool engagement with the stock material more consistently as you follow the curvature of the surface.
Long story short, a 3-axis mill is NOT the appropriate tool for creating a complex lofted surface. A 4-axis mill _IS_.
With the right CAM software, you can generate the tool path against the model, with some parameters for depth of cut and feedrate against tool diameter. (that's how Catia does it anyway. Lets you define if you want climb or conventional milling, then generates generic tool paths around the features you define in your model. Admittedly, Catia wants a nice, high quality NURBS digital part model to work from though. Might not be easily doable with a point cloud derived 3D solid.) I suspect that internally it bases it's 3 axis tool paths around offsets from logical intersections of planes against the model. (EG, intersects a logical plane against the NURBS part model, to produce a closed curve, then offsets from that for tool paths, with some deviations for optimisation)
Since this is just 3 axis, you wouldnt have any complicated surface contouring operations. The best you could do would be with pocketing ops, which would give you a rather rough feature anyway.
This would be more like for flat plastic parts that still, somehow, have an exorbitant price tag. Not for-- EG-- cutting gears or aircraft skin interfaces. (The former should be gut on a lathe with a gear attachment, the latter needs 4 axis or better.)
Good luck with the latter... Machine time is expensive.:(
Personally, I'd use this to make specialty cabinets. Simple 3-axis is all you need, and if you keep the spindle speed down, wood does not need coolant.
For a coolant "enhancement" though, you could add another opcode to the G-program to turn on essentially an aftermarket watergarden fountain pump, and mount the machine over something like a bathtub. That way you could turn on coolant for soft metals like aluminum and copper.
Mild steel would be OK with the right cutters, but anything in the hard steel category would most certainly be outside the cutting abilities of the proposed spindle for this DIY kit. (Prototype specs a dremel tool.) You would just need to sacrifice speed for utility by turning up the spindle speed and radically reducing the depth of cut.
Granted, that would RADICALLY shorten tool life-- and cutters aren't cheap.
That's odd, I always told the students at NIAR that catia was so easy to use, that an angry shaved monkey could probably use it. (Granted, this was as a joke, but I still think it is damn easy to use.)
can you create a 2D nurbs path? Then you can create neat objects with Catia. V5 uses the "Sketcher" interface, and is very similar to sketchup, only more powerful. Oh, and Catia has a fully featured CAM module for 3, 4, and 5+ axis milling. It even has a rapid prototyping workbench for a 3D printer, as well as kinematic simulation abilities.
You can get the student version for about 300$, if you can prove you are an engineering student.
(You can also get the pirate version from PirateBay for 0$...)
The problem with most modeling softwares is that they are polygonally defined geometry. G-Code is more NURBS curves based. (G-Code being what most CNC mills are programmed in.)
As such, most CAD/CAM softwares are internally NURBS, so that you can easily generate arbitrary tool paths to follow a surface. That would be much more difficult to pull off cleanly with a polygon mesh model, due to the lack of true tangent continuity.
Although, it is WAAAAAAAAAAAAAY more expensive than Autocad. (It also does a shitload more, and is easier to use, IMHO. Want to design a radar waveguide? There's a DEDICATED workbench for that! Etc.)
You can already get reasonably inexpensive stereoscopic analysis software (Like photomodeler scanner) that, with the recent Kinect drivers, could be used to scan a 3D object VERY quickly- Could be used to rapid fabricate otherwise expensive parts.
Granted, you would need to know how to make your own 3D toolpaths, but that is not, strictly speaking, terribly hard.
What I want to know is if their 400$ mill is 3 axis, or 4(+) axis-- and also, does it accept G-code. If so, what post processor does it prefer? Does it support any industry De-Facto extensions, like Mazak Mazatrol operations? Etc.. Etc..
While the world in morrowind was supported with a great deal of interesting written texts (The in game myths based curiously around gnostic principles, if you look into it, as opposed to the crap that was Oblivion.), and while the game world was massively non-linear, I seem to recall back then that most of the younger players were bitching HARD about that non-linearity. (That's why the follow up title had so much hand-holding. Somehow the player character has ESP and "Just knows" where to take $RandomQuestItem-- and puts a giant red waypoint on their map...)
Additionally, many MANY people in the forums were immature (doesn't matter what age they were), and did not want to accept the simple and rational consequences their actions had on the main quest and storyline. "What do you mean I can't kill that wizard guy in the full daedric armor?! I WANT THAT ARMOR!" etc. Back when I used to post at Bethesda's forums (You couldnt pay me to go there now.) I used to get swamped with requests from users wanting me and other tech-savvy players to "Fix" their saved games because they went on a bloodthirsty killing spree, and then could not finish the main quest. As far as I know, I was the ONLY one who could repair XBOX saved games, and the XBOX users were the WORST at this. They were REALLY bitchy, because they couldnt just fix it with the console like with the PC version.
(Was actually called upon a great many times by some of the nicer moderators to help people out with dirty disc errors and the like. Long story short, a good portion of the dirty disc problem seems to come from a timeout routine in the cell loading and saved game loading code. If it takes too long: dirty disc error. Since the game stores a non-pruning list of EVERY monster you have killed, EVERY box you have opened, every potion you have ever made, etc-- all that extra data piles up inside the saved game, making it absolutely huge when it doesnt need to be, which slows down the loading process, which creates the disc error with more regularity. Pruning the saved game makes old saves playable again without sacrificing a whole lot. This is enhanced by the XBOX's use of xFAT, and Morrowind's heavy Cache use. This leads to fragmentation of the already huge saved file, further increasing save and load times. In lieu of a defragmenter, I suggested that users buy a cheap memory card unit and copy all their saved games off onto it, delete the copies on the HDD, pop in 3 different game discs in rapid succession to purge the cache partition, then put the saved games back on the drive. Seemed to be effective in arresting the dirty disk problem anyway-not 100%, but still effective. IIRC, it got sticked in an official post by a moderator in one of the technical forums. My experiments determined that even in otherwise ideal conditions, the dirty disc error would be triggered around 90% of the time if the saved game file exceeded 3.5mb in size. After pruning, such bloated saved games usually came down to about 1mb, and the game was highly playable again. Oh yeah, I also helped reverse engineer the font format for the modding community. I understand that bethesda recycled the format for oblivion, and that some oblivion modders created a utility based on the findings of ManaUser and myself way back then with a forum scrape of our technical collaboration.)
In addition to the community's bitching, the actual game engine itself was shoddily written. I suppose that isn't entirely bethesda's fault-- They outsourced their engine, and bought a license for Gamebryo. Still, that's just the framework; Bethesda still screwed up with timings for the audio process, and used very kludgy direct3D calls which wasted CPU and GPU power. (That's why Morrowind has such a low effective FPS, unless you use one of the enhancer programs which intercepts the D3D calls and sanitizes them before pushing them to the GPU. Then, Magically, the game runs MUCH cleaner, and looks MUCH better. Fancy that.
A super capacitor is basically a highly convoluted labarynth of activated carbon, submerged in an electrolyte solution.
It works by radically increasing the surface area of the interface layer, where the electrical charge potential gets stored. More surface area==More theoretical maximum charge.
One could argue that by legally entering a privacy contract with the end user, that they are legally unable to comply with the subpoena. Kinda like a catholic priest refusing to give testimony over a confession he has heard.
The government is unlikely to want to play nice with that arrangement, but that is where the PR machine initiates retaliatory strikes.
Humans already synthesize a biomolecule that interacts with light sources. It's called Melanin.
Genetic engineering to utilize melanin to produce ATP would create natural evolutionary pressure to make humans darker colored, which might piss off certain "Ethnic purity" [cough, sputter] groups, but considering that being darkly colored is widely considered normal, and even attractive, I don't see this as being a problem.
The use of all caps is standard on most (all?) engineering blueprints and drawings. I would get carpal tunnel VERY quickly without my capslock key. (My job title is "quality engineer", but I am essentially a glorified computer draftsman. I make and read blueprints all day.)
This is because these documents often get photocopied for shop floor use, and all caps letters are more legible on the print than is a mix of caps and lower case letters, like would normally be seen in typical human correspondence.
While I am sure you and google mean well, leave my capslock key alone. If you want to combat morons that feel the need to type in all caps on message boards, then do it with a submission filter. (Like the kind that check for profanity, etc.)
Like with all overtly negative activities, the target must be truly deserving.
Take for instance a certain sect of baptist churches in the US recently... The ones that like to "petition" at people's funerals?
Yeah. Not all churches are clean, pure and white like you paint them above. Some might actually be deserving of a little vandalism, (However, it should be pointed out that this was a devil's advocate type joke post, not an edict for vandals to go do those things. EG, it was meant to point out that the security measures taken by the church only address a very narrow aspect of the vandalism issue. The reasons for vandalism were never addressed. Thanks for painting me as a jackass by the way. So nice when people pull an ad hominem on me.)
Similar to what is in compressed air dusters. (usually difluoroethane.)
With both compounds boiling at room temperature though, your ram chips will be internally pressurized, which means mechanical stresses during heating and cooling cycles.
Slashdot Mirror
Also incorrect.
What we "observe" is the filtered subjective experience our eyeballs relay to our brains, caused by the effects photons have on the electron valence configurations of certain molecules, and they retina's primary processing of those changes.
We do not actually "See" photons. We see the effects of photons, in every case.
What if the observable effect is so subtle and small, that it cannot be seperated from experimental error, except at HUGE cosmological scales?
If so, how would you define something like the observed "Dark flow"?
EG-- If no fundemental cause for the dark flow can be determined (As is currently the case), how do you KNOW that it is NOT being caused by a weakly interacting force originating from outside of our universe, that is normally too small to be detected, except over exceedingly large collections of objects?
An interesting conjecture. It would be applicable to any God that is presumed to have created true free will.
However, the christian God has not done so, and does not claim to do so. On the contrary, the christian bible preaches predesintation, which is the antithesis of free will. If anything, this implies a purely deterministic nature to our universe, our own natures imcluded, otherwise God would not be able to be omnicient, and could not make claims like "I am" as in the cryptic hebrew phrase originally used, (It basically means "I am" in all possible tenses; past present and future.) nor could he claim that he "IS" the God of abraham (as in, right now.) even after abraham is long decomposed. It implies that the christian god exists outside of normal time, and to whom the universe as we perceive it is purely deterministic, and basically static.
The "Chinese room" argument would seem applicable in this case; We "intelligent" beings are fundementally incapable of true understanding, since we simply operate with a highly complex, and ultimately predictable (requirement of full determinism) set of programs, that as a matter of happenstance, seem to give reasonable replies, without actually understanding. (Essentially, the neurons in your brain do not actually understand anything-- they simply react programatically to stimulation from sensory organs. They create chains of self-referential outputs that reinforce certain outcomes, again, based on programatically derived behaviors and sensory input. Given sufficient complexity to the system, the illusion of understanding is achieved, without actually achieving it.)
The deterministic nature of humans can be externally supported through a series of simple observations:
A human baby will develop into what appears to be a thinking adult human being, barring a physiological or programmatical anomaly. (Downs syndrome etc for the former-- being raised by wild bears, etc, for the latter.) It does this every time.
If choice was as fundemental as humans like to claim it to be, then children would exhibit wildly divergent outcomes-- "I like dogs better-- I will behave like a dog instead" etc. Some might argue that this is already the case (furries, theianthropism, etc...) but empirical data shows this to be highly exceptional, and more in line with a programatical anomaly, rather than an innate feature. If it were an innate feature, you would have packs of humans running around howling at the moon as a regular occurance, as well as all manner of other "non-human" behaviorisms normally exhibited by "feral children" (children raised outside human companionship before the age of 5). The reason is because the infant human would have made decisions about how it wanted to behave intrinsically, rather than learning through pre-programmed directives for observation and mimicry. Thus, the baby would choose to ignore its parents, and do its own thing. This is contrary to observable human infant behavior, which is highly predictable, and strongly favors determinism.
Children develop the primary "kernel" of social behavior and linguistic capacity within this critical first 5 years of early life. Without that stimulation, they do not grow up to be "people" like you typically understand it. They struggle to even speak, have difficulty with language period, and are unable to grasp societal boundaries and mores. (There is a famous case of a feral child found in rural france shortly after the industrial revolution that is highly illuminating. It is reinforced by other feral child studies. Due to the obvious ethics issues involved, research into feral children is limited to natural occurances of the phenomenon, which is far from commonplace. All the data available though suggests that early socialization is essential to normal human function in adult life.) They basically act like animals.
I suppose a pedant would claim this is not proof of determinism, since the baby does not automatically grow up to behave like a human, even when raised outside of human i
There is also the issue of "quality" of said jobs.
Which is better: Keeping one high-paid engineer, or creating two food services jobs?
In terms of raw metrics, the two food services jobs win, because you lost one job, and produced 2. Thats a net gain of one job,
However, you you break down the effect, losing the highly paid job to create two low paid jobs does more to hurt the economy than does retaining the high paid job. EG-- Person gets paid 30$ an hour. Two min-wage food services people each get paid 7$ an hour. that is 50% less currency changing hands, even though the number of jobs went up 100%.
That's the major issue I have with the "I'll help create jobs!" rhetoric I hear from politicians; what kind of jobs? Will they actually pay for more than just the gas to drive to work, and if you skimp on food and live off the fast food you make at work-- possibly the rent?
For what it's worth, I agree that the questions on that survey were loaded. However, Fox news is hardly what I would choose as my primary source of news coverage. I would be more apt to follow an unfiltered aggregation of international twitter feeds, and I fucking hate twitter.
I can understand that-- (I have read the linked article now, btw. I posted in true slashdot tradition by not reading it first.)
But I would follow up your post a little-- I don't know about Australia, but in the US we also have these 'nosebleed section' areas that the local politicians call "free speech zones." The fact that these even exist at all speaks contrary to the "No, the current enforcement is good and wholesome, if you would just file the paperwork on time!" rhetoric.
Like all galvanized media events, I would say the truth lies somewhere in the middle.
This time with more than just the pirate parties involved.
but still-- "Police oppose a planned demonstration?" I will have to read the linked article, because that is some fishy sounding shit.
Why does this suprise?
People in positions of authority, more often than not, got there because they have skills at manipulating people, and asserting control. NOT because they have some innate understanding of what they are actually in control over, or some special vocational talent other than essentially bullying and mind control techniques. (No, not the tinfoil hat kind-- the 'guilt trip, and glowing smile charisma' kind.)
As such, when the reality of the complete absence of a foundation for that authority is exposed, tight-fisted clampdowns happen.
A good example: Sobriety laws during prohibition. People flaunted the sobriety laws, "Authority figures" in government clamped down to maintain their authority in that matter-- ultimately lost.
This time we have Wikileaks and individuals in areas with sensitive data releasing said data to the public (Flaunting the "Secrets" rules and laws), and the authority figures impacted are clamping down, predicably, because they have no real power to exercise other than their ability to manipulate the opinions of other people.
This is precisely why the Mainstream media is performing rampant character assasination against Wikileaks, why the government is stamping its little feet in a tantrum and blocking sites en-mass, and why senators are calling for blood.
The power of our government stems from the strength of our military. (Because our government has become tyrranical. It keeps secrets from the public because it does not trust the public. It needs the muscle of the military and local police to enforce its will on the public. The second amendment was meant to prevent this, by keeping the government healthfully wary of trying this, but has successfully neutered the public's ability to revolt, and so now just relies on military power to maintain order. The intended design of our government was to be the inverse, where voting is a proxy for offing the government with violence; and where that is rendered impossible, to have the second amendment to fall back on to do the housekeeping when/if it becomes necessary.)
When the military [rather, the people in it] realises or is made aware of the abuses it is being made an accomplice to, (A-la manning) it may react contrary to the designs of those in authority, circumventing that authority. When that happens, the sword the government uses to exert its will starts to cut the other way. Naturally, they don't want that. Being exposed as impotent usurpers doing dirty, one-sided dealings is one of their greatest fears. The incompetent and decietful are always afraid of being found out. ("And I would have gotten away with it too, if it weren't for those meddling kids!" etc.)
As such, the people in authority in this situation have decided that the solution is *NOT* to change policy so that the military will no longer have incentive to disobey and go maverick on them when such information comes out, but instead to make the individual people in the military as ignorant of the big picture as possible, so that they can continue to abuse the power the military provides them, while minimising the risks of creating another Manning.
As such, I would expect the government to be enacting the following damage control:
1) Discredit the leaker as much as possible, and make an example of them. (Check!)
2) Discredit the organisation(s) that fascilitated the leaks, and blacklist them (Check!)
3) Distract attention away from security leaks as much as possible in the media, and focus on how the government is making people "safer." (TSA--Check, Murdock and pals demonize freed information and informants-- check, Government releases press releases about improved security as nebulously as possible- check.)
4) Compartmentalize all information sources, and enact strong-arm measures against government employees. Emphasize that all employees are being constantly monitored and will be sent to android hell at the first act of defiance. (Check.)
5) Create new laws premitting the government to harshly d
OK, I have karma to blow.
While I am most certainly NOT a proponent of the "political correctness" intellectual plague, Racism serves no legitimate purpose and serves only to highlight the ignorance and repulsiveness of the person who practices it.
That said, the word "nigger" has at least 3 definitions in most dictionaries. It is quite possible to have $Ethnic 'niggers', where $Ethnic can equal "white", if you use the second or third definition. It is therefor not explicitly referring to darkly colored people in a racially pejorative manner. (Much like saying "Red Neck" does not explicitly imply that the target of the slur is white. It implies a specific behavior instead.)
2.
Slang: Extremely Disparaging and Offensive . a person of any race or origin regarded as contemptible, inferior, ignorant, etc.
3.
a victim of prejudice similar to that suffered by blacks; a person who is economically, politically, or socially disenfranchised.
Ergo, the anonymous coward that continually spews racial epithets is a filthy fucking nigger himself, and should take a good long look in the mirror. (assuming the intense amount of niggery badness being reflected is not too much for the mirror to withstand without spontaneously shattering, of course. That particular AC is exceptionally base.)
Now-- This information in hand, the GGP who said that the EPA fucktards who let this shit through knowingly are niggers-- would appear to be using the word properly with the second dictionary term, despite such use being in epically bad taste due to the commonly associated implication of the racially bigoted first definition (A condition at least partially maintained by the knee-jerk reactions of people when it is used, preventing it migrating to a race neutral word). In such circumstances, the poster would do well to qualify beforehand exactly how they are using that word, because it is a buzzword for certain demographics. (In all areas in which a word can be used as a buzzword. Some use it wrecklessly, some consider it universally racist, some pick it up as their "cause" to abolish the use of, etc.)
Personally, I only use this word when the situation is not only "Extremely bad", but "So bad it couldn't possibly get any worse", and then only as the second term listed above, as describing people. EG-- Bigots are fucking niggers.
Feel free to mod me down all you like.
Personally, I'd be surprised at the discovery of an ad serving network that DIDN'T serve malware on the side.
I have never understood why advert networks allow their "Partners" to cross-load javascript, and other scripted media objects. If the advert requires a "phone home" script, then it should have that script hosted, and vetted by the advert network they are partnered with, rather than playing a shell game of spot the malware.
Any advert that tries to hot-load a javascript or other scripted media object should be immediately rejected. (it should be pretty trivial to catch such hot-loading attempts with a submission filter, same with loading PDFs, etc. Likewise the use of obfuscated javascript techniques should auto reject.)
There really is no reason for this, other than that the ad networks themselves dont trust EACH OTHER. (EG, they dont want their partners to get their 'oh so important' metrics data instead of them-- or rather, they want to get that data directly themselves, and dont trust their partners to give it to them quickly enough, or accurately. [the potential for the ad-host to screw over the ad-producer over faulty serving metrics would be outstanding if the ad producer had to rely on metrics recorded exclusively by the ad-host, but fuck them.])
Internet advertising is one of the few things about the modern internet that could actually stand to have a little multinational regulation imposed on it. (And then, purely technical regulations intended to greatly frustrate malware distribution, and nothing else.)
Most likely the progenitor cells that are in the main body of the testis. It is likely that a simple biopsy would be sufficient to harvest these progenitor cells.
In male vertibrates the testes are comprised of vascular tissues that feed a labyrinth of micro-tubule structures, which then connect to the upper portion of the epididymis. Inside these tubules there are colonies of spermatogenic progenitor cells, which divide once via mitosis, then divide a second time into early, non-motile sperm cells via meiosis. These non-motile, and immature sperm cells migrate through this network of microtubules into the epididymis where additional external factors and hormonal secretions initiate many of the morphological changes in sperm cells. They then pass into the lower portion of the epididymis where they are stored prior to ejaculation.
I hope that this answers your question.
If you are worried that they would confiscate your whole testicle, I would say that your worries are unfounded. These progenitor cells are highly copious in quantity inside your testes, and a simple needle biopsy would most certainly be sufficient.
Not exactly,
G-code allows actual circles and arcs to be defined using a radius, a starting point, and a direction.
While not true NURBS, since there is no spline operation that I am aware of, making use of these operations will increase the efficiency of your toolpath considerably. Interpolating point locations creates a rough finish inside cylinder walls, etc.
Granted, most people do not make optimal tool paths, and some post processors mangle arc and circle directives and generate discrete point-point operations from them internally anyway, (usually on craptastical machines anyway), but that does not mean that G-code is strictly point-point operations.
Most 3-axis parts are "prismatic solids." While you are correct that this is really 2.5 axis, you actively use the Z axis for some operations, such as helical milling. (This is the more optimal method of cutting out a cylendrical opening with an end mill, because it keeps the cutter engaged at full chip load consistently.)
When cutting a complex surface with an end-mill, you will find that you cannot produce a smooth contoured 3D pocket bottom with a 3-axis unit. This is because the tip of the mill must be fully engaged to avoid chatter, damage to the spindle, and avoid destroying the end-mill itself. The variable chipload you would create would destroy the flutes of the cutter very quickly. (Basically, the variable load breaks off the edges of the flutes near the tip, which unbalances the cutter, which damages the spindle.) If you use a ballnose end mill to try to overcome this problem, you will have problems with scallops.
A 4-axis mill can do surface profiling of the sort you have in mind, by angling the cutter and maintaining tool engagement with the stock material more consistently as you follow the curvature of the surface.
Long story short, a 3-axis mill is NOT the appropriate tool for creating a complex lofted surface. A 4-axis mill _IS_.
With the right CAM software, you can generate the tool path against the model, with some parameters for depth of cut and feedrate against tool diameter. (that's how Catia does it anyway. Lets you define if you want climb or conventional milling, then generates generic tool paths around the features you define in your model. Admittedly, Catia wants a nice, high quality NURBS digital part model to work from though. Might not be easily doable with a point cloud derived 3D solid.) I suspect that internally it bases it's 3 axis tool paths around offsets from logical intersections of planes against the model. (EG, intersects a logical plane against the NURBS part model, to produce a closed curve, then offsets from that for tool paths, with some deviations for optimisation)
Since this is just 3 axis, you wouldnt have any complicated surface contouring operations. The best you could do would be with pocketing ops, which would give you a rather rough feature anyway.
This would be more like for flat plastic parts that still, somehow, have an exorbitant price tag. Not for-- EG-- cutting gears or aircraft skin interfaces. (The former should be gut on a lathe with a gear attachment, the latter needs 4 axis or better.)
Good luck with the latter... Machine time is expensive. :(
Personally, I'd use this to make specialty cabinets. Simple 3-axis is all you need, and if you keep the spindle speed down, wood does not need coolant.
For a coolant "enhancement" though, you could add another opcode to the G-program to turn on essentially an aftermarket watergarden fountain pump, and mount the machine over something like a bathtub. That way you could turn on coolant for soft metals like aluminum and copper.
Mild steel would be OK with the right cutters, but anything in the hard steel category would most certainly be outside the cutting abilities of the proposed spindle for this DIY kit. (Prototype specs a dremel tool.) You would just need to sacrifice speed for utility by turning up the spindle speed and radically reducing the depth of cut.
Granted, that would RADICALLY shorten tool life-- and cutters aren't cheap.
That's odd, I always told the students at NIAR that catia was so easy to use, that an angry shaved monkey could probably use it. (Granted, this was as a joke, but I still think it is damn easy to use.)
can you create a 2D nurbs path? Then you can create neat objects with Catia. V5 uses the "Sketcher" interface, and is very similar to sketchup, only more powerful. Oh, and Catia has a fully featured CAM module for 3, 4, and 5+ axis milling. It even has a rapid prototyping workbench for a 3D printer, as well as kinematic simulation abilities.
You can get the student version for about 300$, if you can prove you are an engineering student.
(You can also get the pirate version from PirateBay for 0$...)
Catia is the shit.
The problem with most modeling softwares is that they are polygonally defined geometry. G-Code is more NURBS curves based. (G-Code being what most CNC mills are programmed in.)
As such, most CAD/CAM softwares are internally NURBS, so that you can easily generate arbitrary tool paths to follow a surface. That would be much more difficult to pull off cleanly with a polygon mesh model, due to the lack of true tangent continuity.
You should try Dassault Systemes Catia.
Although, it is WAAAAAAAAAAAAAY more expensive than Autocad. (It also does a shitload more, and is easier to use, IMHO. Want to design a radar waveguide? There's a DEDICATED workbench for that! Etc.)
Not true exactly--
You can already get reasonably inexpensive stereoscopic analysis software (Like photomodeler scanner) that, with the recent Kinect drivers, could be used to scan a 3D object VERY quickly- Could be used to rapid fabricate otherwise expensive parts.
Granted, you would need to know how to make your own 3D toolpaths, but that is not, strictly speaking, terribly hard.
What I want to know is if their 400$ mill is 3 axis, or 4(+) axis-- and also, does it accept G-code. If so, what post processor does it prefer? Does it support any industry De-Facto extensions, like Mazak Mazatrol operations? Etc.. Etc..
*/Initiate Rant cycle/*
Initiate(Rant);
While the world in morrowind was supported with a great deal of interesting written texts (The in game myths based curiously around gnostic principles, if you look into it, as opposed to the crap that was Oblivion.), and while the game world was massively non-linear, I seem to recall back then that most of the younger players were bitching HARD about that non-linearity. (That's why the follow up title had so much hand-holding. Somehow the player character has ESP and "Just knows" where to take $RandomQuestItem-- and puts a giant red waypoint on their map...)
Additionally, many MANY people in the forums were immature (doesn't matter what age they were), and did not want to accept the simple and rational consequences their actions had on the main quest and storyline. "What do you mean I can't kill that wizard guy in the full daedric armor?! I WANT THAT ARMOR!" etc. Back when I used to post at Bethesda's forums (You couldnt pay me to go there now.) I used to get swamped with requests from users wanting me and other tech-savvy players to "Fix" their saved games because they went on a bloodthirsty killing spree, and then could not finish the main quest. As far as I know, I was the ONLY one who could repair XBOX saved games, and the XBOX users were the WORST at this. They were REALLY bitchy, because they couldnt just fix it with the console like with the PC version.
(Was actually called upon a great many times by some of the nicer moderators to help people out with dirty disc errors and the like. Long story short, a good portion of the dirty disc problem seems to come from a timeout routine in the cell loading and saved game loading code. If it takes too long: dirty disc error. Since the game stores a non-pruning list of EVERY monster you have killed, EVERY box you have opened, every potion you have ever made, etc-- all that extra data piles up inside the saved game, making it absolutely huge when it doesnt need to be, which slows down the loading process, which creates the disc error with more regularity. Pruning the saved game makes old saves playable again without sacrificing a whole lot. This is enhanced by the XBOX's use of xFAT, and Morrowind's heavy Cache use. This leads to fragmentation of the already huge saved file, further increasing save and load times. In lieu of a defragmenter, I suggested that users buy a cheap memory card unit and copy all their saved games off onto it, delete the copies on the HDD, pop in 3 different game discs in rapid succession to purge the cache partition, then put the saved games back on the drive. Seemed to be effective in arresting the dirty disk problem anyway-not 100%, but still effective. IIRC, it got sticked in an official post by a moderator in one of the technical forums. My experiments determined that even in otherwise ideal conditions, the dirty disc error would be triggered around 90% of the time if the saved game file exceeded 3.5mb in size. After pruning, such bloated saved games usually came down to about 1mb, and the game was highly playable again. Oh yeah, I also helped reverse engineer the font format for the modding community. I understand that bethesda recycled the format for oblivion, and that some oblivion modders created a utility based on the findings of ManaUser and myself way back then with a forum scrape of our technical collaboration.)
In addition to the community's bitching, the actual game engine itself was shoddily written. I suppose that isn't entirely bethesda's fault-- They outsourced their engine, and bought a license for Gamebryo. Still, that's just the framework; Bethesda still screwed up with timings for the audio process, and used very kludgy direct3D calls which wasted CPU and GPU power. (That's why Morrowind has such a low effective FPS, unless you use one of the enhancer programs which intercepts the D3D calls and sanitizes them before pushing them to the GPU. Then, Magically, the game runs MUCH cleaner, and looks MUCH better. Fancy that.
In short, I have respect for som
A super capacitor is basically a highly convoluted labarynth of activated carbon, submerged in an electrolyte solution.
It works by radically increasing the surface area of the interface layer, where the electrical charge potential gets stored. More surface area==More theoretical maximum charge.
An electron micrograph of the kind of activated carbon in question is really all you need to see to understand just how much surface area you are talking here by using the activated carbon instead of the more traditional interfaces used in normal electrolytic capacitors.
One could argue that by legally entering a privacy contract with the end user, that they are legally unable to comply with the subpoena. Kinda like a catholic priest refusing to give testimony over a confession he has heard.
The government is unlikely to want to play nice with that arrangement, but that is where the PR machine initiates retaliatory strikes.
Humans already synthesize a biomolecule that interacts with light sources. It's called Melanin.
Genetic engineering to utilize melanin to produce ATP would create natural evolutionary pressure to make humans darker colored, which might piss off certain "Ethnic purity" [cough, sputter] groups, but considering that being darkly colored is widely considered normal, and even attractive, I don't see this as being a problem.
The use of all caps is standard on most (all?) engineering blueprints and drawings. I would get carpal tunnel VERY quickly without my capslock key. (My job title is "quality engineer", but I am essentially a glorified computer draftsman. I make and read blueprints all day.)
This is because these documents often get photocopied for shop floor use, and all caps letters are more legible on the print than is a mix of caps and lower case letters, like would normally be seen in typical human correspondence.
While I am sure you and google mean well, leave my capslock key alone. If you want to combat morons that feel the need to type in all caps on message boards, then do it with a submission filter. (Like the kind that check for profanity, etc.)
Like with all overtly negative activities, the target must be truly deserving.
Take for instance a certain sect of baptist churches in the US recently... The ones that like to "petition" at people's funerals?
Yeah. Not all churches are clean, pure and white like you paint them above. Some might actually be deserving of a little vandalism, (However, it should be pointed out that this was a devil's advocate type joke post, not an edict for vandals to go do those things. EG, it was meant to point out that the security measures taken by the church only address a very narrow aspect of the vandalism issue. The reasons for vandalism were never addressed. Thanks for painting me as a jackass by the way. So nice when people pull an ad hominem on me.)
tetrafluoroethane. A fluorocarbon.
Similar to what is in compressed air dusters. (usually difluoroethane.)
With both compounds boiling at room temperature though, your ram chips will be internally pressurized, which means mechanical stresses during heating and cooling cycles.