What is not waterfront property today, will be in the future. If I had lots of money I'd be buying it up now to resell later as increased value waterfront property.
I happily give them my phone number. I just don't answer my phone except for whitelisted numbers that have a non-mute ringtone. Solves all manner of problems. A mute ringtone is one that makes zero noise, and that's the default on my phone.
The day of unplanned voice telephone comms from random callers is past for me. You want me, then email me, or text me. We can arrange a phone call if need be; but cold calls? No. Not happening. Telemarketers and various other forms of similar lowlife have shit that bed beyond all recovery.
I don't pay any attention to voice messaging, either. The idea of someone trying leave me a voice message fills me with glee... they just spent some fraction of their life for nothing.
They may wreck texting eventually as well. But perhaps not. The same filtering that works (and very well, too) with email could work with texting. Whitelists, smart filtering... bring it on, I say.
I used to have a busy signal for my answering machine message. I wonder if any phones allow a different answer message for white listed and black listed numbers.
Indiana isn't a rich enough State to create a police state, the best they can hope for is to stomp on the rights of a few kids and maybe silence a few people who weren't sure if they wanted to speak, or not.
If Indiana does not have a police state, then they are working on financing it:
There seems to be a grey area between fiction, and really harmful content. However the line between free speech, and being uncomfortable about something is very hard to draw.
I'm not sure how to objectively draw a boundary. However if the game is setup to allow real life footage to be amended with zombie shooting, this would have happened sooner or later.
How this finally plays out is actually important for the future boundaries of free speech.
This specific problem has existed for more than three decades. In high school one of my friends got in trouble for doing the same thing using Adventure Construction Set on the Apple 2. He made a model of our school with NPCs based on the teachers and students and when the school found out, there was hell to pay for anybody who was involved.
There was a time when the USA could build them "fast enough", and the USA has only grown in population, industrial capacity, and wealth.
Industrial capacity does not take into account industrial diversity. The US has to import large power distribution transformers and parts for nuclear power plants because it lacks the facilities to fabricate them.
They are only more expensive if you don't know how to do math (or if someone else pays your power bill).
And if you include the true reliability instead of the claimed reliability, they again cost more than cheap incandescent lamps. Manufacturers list the LED operating life which has nothing to do with failures of the ballast electronics. I am luck to get more than 6 months out of any bulb which uses an electronic ballast. Even California released a report saying that they massively overestimated the cost savings because failure rates where much higher than the manufacturers specified.
They require the same thing from gun purchasers and that has constitutional protections, the chance that local judges will rule against the city is low.
Having studied some lawsuits and criminal trials that progressed through the NY court system, I would say that the chances are zero.
The real question is if they can implement permissions checks without taking a negative IPC or power consumption hit. I would expect them to pair such a change with a node transition in an attempt to mask the performance hit with the uplift from a more advanced process node. The nightmare scenario would be for them to see the entire process node transition performance uplift effectively lost to security enhancements.
The data for the permission check already exists. The difference between Intel and AMD is that AMD executes the permission check during the load and Intel executes the permission check later during instruction retirement which is when other faults are generated. The speculated code never generates a visible fault in either case because it only executes during a (deliberately) mispredicted branch.
Any difference in performance in hardware comes from correctly predicted faults but this is much less performance loss than the software remedies. Specter is a whole different problem however because it is a flaw in software which CPU access control cannot do anything about. The solution there is to convert the Specter problem to a Meltdown problem on a CPU not vulnerable to Meltdown.
A president could tell congress that going to Mars will defeat isis and al-queda, because they can't get there, and therefore we will be safe. And reasons. : (
If it's not illegal - then why did Cohen plead guilty to it?
Because it *is* illegal.
It was illegal for Trump to personally pay her because it would be for "the purpose of influencing any election" and it was illegal for Trump's campaign to pay her because it would be "diverting campaign funds to "personal use".
Congresspeople using Congress's funds to pay off accusers isn't a private person spending money to further the campaign, failing to document it properly and exceeding contribution limits. It's different and it should be illegal, but it's not.
It is illegal; it is diverting funds to personal use.
Heads they win and tails you lose if the prosecutor wants it that way.
It isn't illegal to pay someone to keep quiet. It happens every single day. Congress even has a special tax-payer fund they use to pay off people who accuse them of sexual harassment - to get the money they have to sign NDA's. When will those people be indicted for paying hush-money?
That Trump paid off the porn star with his own money may be seedy but is easily explained by trying to protect his family and he would've done it even if he weren't running for office.
Nearly every law expert disagrees with you.
But not to worry, if it's not this, something else will bring him down. There's plenty of evidence. He's the opposite of honest.
It was illegal for Trump to personally pay her because it would be for "the purpose of influencing any election" and it was illegal for Trump's campaign to pay her because it would be "diverting campaign funds to "personal use". I am all for these aspects of election law to be enforced against every elected politician in government so that they may be sent to prison with no exceptions.
I did not know they were box girders. It's not their use of a box girder that is unusual, it's how there are three cable-stayed sections with no overlap in stays. Not only is there no overlap, they bridge the section between cable-stayed sections with these freestanding concrete sections. If you do a Google search for cable stayed bridge, you will see almost all of them with more than one cable stayed section have significant overlap between stayed sections, or the part that it bridges is much smaller than what you see here. There was a very high proportion of non-stayed to stayed deck in this bridge.
I have seen them at either end of suspension bridges which use riveted girders. I suspect in this case it was done to add expansion joints between the cable stayed spans.
I've also never seen suspension bridge (ok, technically cable-stayed bridge) where they span two suspended portions with nothing but a more-or-less standard concrete segment. Maybe this was common at one time, but most of the recent ones seem to overlap the stays.
The concrete segment is a box girder albeit a very flat one. You may have seen similar spans where the traffic is inside of the box girder instead of on top but they are the same thing.
> Third, I don't see the added value. The refrigeration doesn't have to be internal (so you don't need the extra weight on board and can avoid ice buildup).
SpaceX uses densified propellant. Meaning, it's loaded at a temperature significantly below boiling point, which means simply replentishing what boils off doesn't work, as at that point it's already too warm to be useful.
That's why SpaceX needs to abort if the rocket spends too long sitting on the pad. The only solution if the propellant warms up too much is to drain all the fuel, and refuel the rocket again.
That's unless you're suggesting they should make some sort of giant cooler that wraps around the entire rocket.
If the tanks can take it, then they could be pumped down while the fuel is loaded to evaporatively lower the temperature of the fuel and oxidizer.
From what I understand of the whole certification process, in order to be approved you can either do a whole bunch of component testing and paperwork, or you can fly your rocket a number of times.
SLS is going the component testing/paperwork route, SpaceX is reducing the paperwork and flying their rockets.
What it does highlight is the flexibility in the process. The old-school space crowd can still do it their way with the paperwork and the new guys can just go fly rockets and in the end you can get two different and probably-safe rockets out of it.
NASA is not allowing SpaceX to achieve certification by just flying their rockets. Because they are reusable, NASA is also requiring teardown and analysis which is where the requirement to improve their turbopump design came from. When the same problem with cracked turbine blades was found in the shuttle main engines, NASA changed the failure requirements to allow them.
IP is not suitable for emergency broadcasts because of low reliability. Even satellite broadcasts are questionable in heavy weather but without local OTA, they would not carry local emergency broadcasts anyway.
So there is a reason to keep OTA broadcast stations for both television and radio around but it may not be enough. Who needs weather alerts and emergency broadcasts anyway?
Hydro is limited. Hydro is very nice as it has such a low CO2 footprint, is safe, and therefore should be used as much as we can.
Hydroelectric power is a lot of things including the most dangerous of the non-fossil fuel power sources (except biofuel/biomass) due to just the immediate causalities from dam failures. That is 3 times more dangerous than solar, 9 times more dangerous than wind, and 16 times more dangerous than nuclear. Including casualties from long term effects like famine makes it several times more dangerous but that would apply to any dam whether power producing or not.
Slashdot Mirror
Wrong. Not gun-free zone. Please stop. Signed, anon guy who actually lives in Jax.
The Jacksonville Landing rules of conduct say otherwise:
https://www.jacksonvillelandin...
I can guarantee that this happened in a "gun free zone."
It was:
Possession of a weapon, even if legally carried (except by law enforcement officers) is absolutely prohibited on Landing property.
https://www.jacksonvillelandin...
Concealed weapons permits are trivial to get here in FL.
And a person lawfully carrying a concealed weapon in Florida would not be carrying at the Jacksonville Landing because:
Possession of a weapon, even if legally carried (except by law enforcement officers) is absolutely prohibited on Landing property.
What is not waterfront property today, will be in the future. If I had lots of money I'd be buying it up now to resell later as increased value waterfront property.
Otisburg?
I happily give them my phone number. I just don't answer my phone except for whitelisted numbers that have a non-mute ringtone. Solves all manner of problems. A mute ringtone is one that makes zero noise, and that's the default on my phone.
The day of unplanned voice telephone comms from random callers is past for me. You want me, then email me, or text me. We can arrange a phone call if need be; but cold calls? No. Not happening. Telemarketers and various other forms of similar lowlife have shit that bed beyond all recovery.
I don't pay any attention to voice messaging, either. The idea of someone trying leave me a voice message fills me with glee... they just spent some fraction of their life for nothing.
They may wreck texting eventually as well. But perhaps not. The same filtering that works (and very well, too) with email could work with texting. Whitelists, smart filtering... bring it on, I say.
I used to have a busy signal for my answering machine message. I wonder if any phones allow a different answer message for white listed and black listed numbers.
Indiana isn't a rich enough State to create a police state, the best they can hope for is to stomp on the rights of a few kids and maybe silence a few people who weren't sure if they wanted to speak, or not.
If Indiana does not have a police state, then they are working on financing it:
https://ij.org/press-release/i...
There seems to be a grey area between fiction, and really harmful content. However the line between free speech, and being uncomfortable about something is very hard to draw.
I'm not sure how to objectively draw a boundary. However if the game is setup to allow real life footage to be amended with zombie shooting, this would have happened sooner or later.
How this finally plays out is actually important for the future boundaries of free speech.
This specific problem has existed for more than three decades. In high school one of my friends got in trouble for doing the same thing using Adventure Construction Set on the Apple 2. He made a model of our school with NPCs based on the teachers and students and when the school found out, there was hell to pay for anybody who was involved.
As far as drawing a boundary it is easy. According to the US Supreme Court, you will know it when you see it.
Either party is free to walk away from the transaction rather than go ahead with it. How is that a problem?
Seems equal and fair to both sides.
Do you mean like baking cakes? Or providing banking services?
There was a time when the USA could build them "fast enough", and the USA has only grown in population, industrial capacity, and wealth.
Industrial capacity does not take into account industrial diversity. The US has to import large power distribution transformers and parts for nuclear power plants because it lacks the facilities to fabricate them.
They are only more expensive if you don't know how to do math (or if someone else pays your power bill).
And if you include the true reliability instead of the claimed reliability, they again cost more than cheap incandescent lamps. Manufacturers list the LED operating life which has nothing to do with failures of the ballast electronics. I am luck to get more than 6 months out of any bulb which uses an electronic ballast. Even California released a report saying that they massively overestimated the cost savings because failure rates where much higher than the manufacturers specified.
This is just another example of rent seeking.
They require the same thing from gun purchasers and that has constitutional protections, the chance that local judges will rule against the city is low.
Having studied some lawsuits and criminal trials that progressed through the NY court system, I would say that the chances are zero.
The real question is if they can implement permissions checks without taking a negative IPC or power consumption hit. I would expect them to pair such a change with a node transition in an attempt to mask the performance hit with the uplift from a more advanced process node. The nightmare scenario would be for them to see the entire process node transition performance uplift effectively lost to security enhancements.
The data for the permission check already exists. The difference between Intel and AMD is that AMD executes the permission check during the load and Intel executes the permission check later during instruction retirement which is when other faults are generated. The speculated code never generates a visible fault in either case because it only executes during a (deliberately) mispredicted branch.
Any difference in performance in hardware comes from correctly predicted faults but this is much less performance loss than the software remedies. Specter is a whole different problem however because it is a flaw in software which CPU access control cannot do anything about. The solution there is to convert the Specter problem to a Meltdown problem on a CPU not vulnerable to Meltdown.
A president could tell congress that going to Mars will defeat isis and al-queda, because they can't get there, and therefore we will be safe. And reasons. : (
Or that Mars has oil. Or that Mars has WMDs.
If it's not illegal - then why did Cohen plead guilty to it?
Because it *is* illegal.
It was illegal for Trump to personally pay her because it would be for "the purpose of influencing any election" and it was illegal for Trump's campaign to pay her because it would be "diverting campaign funds to "personal use".
Congresspeople using Congress's funds to pay off accusers isn't a private person spending money to further the campaign, failing to document it properly and exceeding contribution limits. It's different and it should be illegal, but it's not.
It is illegal; it is diverting funds to personal use.
Heads they win and tails you lose if the prosecutor wants it that way.
It isn't illegal to pay someone to keep quiet. It happens every single day. Congress even has a special tax-payer fund they use to pay off people who accuse them of sexual harassment - to get the money they have to sign NDA's. When will those people be indicted for paying hush-money?
That Trump paid off the porn star with his own money may be seedy but is easily explained by trying to protect his family and he would've done it even if he weren't running for office.
Nearly every law expert disagrees with you.
But not to worry, if it's not this, something else will bring him down. There's plenty of evidence. He's the opposite of honest.
It was illegal for Trump to personally pay her because it would be for "the purpose of influencing any election" and it was illegal for Trump's campaign to pay her because it would be "diverting campaign funds to "personal use". I am all for these aspects of election law to be enforced against every elected politician in government so that they may be sent to prison with no exceptions.
http://reason.com/archives/201...
Or this could be because campaign finance law is so complicated that nobody knows what is illegal and what is not.
http://reason.com/archives/201...
I did not know they were box girders. It's not their use of a box girder that is unusual, it's how there are three cable-stayed sections with no overlap in stays. Not only is there no overlap, they bridge the section between cable-stayed sections with these freestanding concrete sections. If you do a Google search for cable stayed bridge, you will see almost all of them with more than one cable stayed section have significant overlap between stayed sections, or the part that it bridges is much smaller than what you see here. There was a very high proportion of non-stayed to stayed deck in this bridge.
I have seen them at either end of suspension bridges which use riveted girders. I suspect in this case it was done to add expansion joints between the cable stayed spans.
I've also never seen suspension bridge (ok, technically cable-stayed bridge) where they span two suspended portions with nothing but a more-or-less standard concrete segment. Maybe this was common at one time, but most of the recent ones seem to overlap the stays.
The concrete segment is a box girder albeit a very flat one. You may have seen similar spans where the traffic is inside of the box girder instead of on top but they are the same thing.
Most of which companies hire them.
What? Did you mean, "Most companies hire them" or something else?
Range safety is *very* important. (Obscure?)
> Third, I don't see the added value. The refrigeration doesn't have to be internal (so you don't need the extra weight on board and can avoid ice buildup).
SpaceX uses densified propellant. Meaning, it's loaded at a temperature significantly below boiling point, which means simply replentishing what boils off doesn't work, as at that point it's already too warm to be useful.
That's why SpaceX needs to abort if the rocket spends too long sitting on the pad. The only solution if the propellant warms up too much is to drain all the fuel, and refuel the rocket again.
That's unless you're suggesting they should make some sort of giant cooler that wraps around the entire rocket.
If the tanks can take it, then they could be pumped down while the fuel is loaded to evaporatively lower the temperature of the fuel and oxidizer.
From what I understand of the whole certification process, in order to be approved you can either do a whole bunch of component testing and paperwork, or you can fly your rocket a number of times.
SLS is going the component testing/paperwork route, SpaceX is reducing the paperwork and flying their rockets.
What it does highlight is the flexibility in the process. The old-school space crowd can still do it their way with the paperwork and the new guys can just go fly rockets and in the end you can get two different and probably-safe rockets out of it.
NASA is not allowing SpaceX to achieve certification by just flying their rockets. Because they are reusable, NASA is also requiring teardown and analysis which is where the requirement to improve their turbopump design came from. When the same problem with cracked turbine blades was found in the shuttle main engines, NASA changed the failure requirements to allow them.
IP is not suitable for emergency broadcasts because of low reliability. Even satellite broadcasts are questionable in heavy weather but without local OTA, they would not carry local emergency broadcasts anyway.
So there is a reason to keep OTA broadcast stations for both television and radio around but it may not be enough. Who needs weather alerts and emergency broadcasts anyway?
Hydro is limited. Hydro is very nice as it has such a low CO2 footprint, is safe, and therefore should be used as much as we can.
Hydroelectric power is a lot of things including the most dangerous of the non-fossil fuel power sources (except biofuel/biomass) due to just the immediate causalities from dam failures. That is 3 times more dangerous than solar, 9 times more dangerous than wind, and 16 times more dangerous than nuclear. Including casualties from long term effects like famine makes it several times more dangerous but that would apply to any dam whether power producing or not.
So the attack is a browser application that loads so much trash that it produces a denial of service via resource exhaustion?