People's rights be even more restricted if he had never invented the infrared grill in the first place.
Except that people have been broiling meat for centuries, if not longer, and the basic principle of broiling meat is that the heat is transferred through thermal radiation.
So cooking meat in this way is hardly a new idea. Having a device to do it outside rather than inside is thus a trivial novelty, especially considering that it was probably first done outside anyway.
If you had over 100 tests of her ability to perceive the EM radiation with more than 2/3 right, I'd be more likely to believe that she's not convincing herself of the presence of EM radiation.
It wouldn't require 100. 20 out of 30 correct is statistically significant at the standard p 0.05 threshold.
Frankly I've never understood why in the US all the ISPs only give "unlimited download" accounts.
Because people don't like surprises on their bill, don't want to estimate how much they've used, don't want to be calculating the cost of everything they want to do, and don't like to screw around with a complicated connection when simpler ones are available.
Also, it's still not terribly efficient, since it requires 1 lb of aluminum per mile you drive.
Gasoline is about a fifth of a pound per mile you drive, so that isn't terribly far off. Although carrying 300 pounds of aluminum to your car would be more difficult than pumping 13 gallons of gasoline. Someone would have to come up with a convenient delivery method.
If they extend immunity to Dell, they can't make legal threats to Dell. It seems to me like Microsoft is a two-headed monster lately which can't agree with itself on how to attack.
It's important to note that these new ratings also change the mileage estimates for pure gasoline engines as well.
And not only that, if you check the table in the linked article, not only does it change the estimates for pure gasoline engines, but the changes are proportional. The relative difference between the hybrid and pure gasoline cars is almost exactly the same under the new system as under the old. This raises the total estimated gasoline cost of driving both types of cars, which if anything, makes the hybrid cars MORE financially attractive, as gasoline cost is then estimated as a bigger fraction of the total cost of ownership.
1) It's not unreasonable to search and seize whatever we have to, if it means keeping the public safe from another 9/11.
Yes it is unreasonable. The next revolutionary war to regain the basic freedom to think what we want and organize anti-establishment political movements could result in a lot more bloodshed than 9/11 ever did. It's much safer for our children to keep those freedoms now than to let them be taken away, and as a nice bonus, they would get to live somewhere worth living.
2) We have probable cause to believe that terror cells are operating somewhere in the US, and the Internet is the place it's holding its meetings.
Criminals and murderers have been operating in the U.S. for a very long time. Discarding the Bill of Rights because two buildings were knocked down is profoundly naive. Get a more realistic perspective of the relative importance of these two things.
Don't be naive.
How did reminding people that the highest law of the land supports basic personal freedom become naive???
Scanning Internet packets also does not constitute either a search nor a seizure.
Under what abuse of the English language is that not a search? Is requiring the Pony Express rider to hand over each letter of mine to be "scanned" not a search?
All the new law requires is that the ISP willingly pass over any of that information to the FBI upon issuance of a warrant.
If this were being done with proper warrants, no one would be complaining. The Constitution already permits search and seizure of just about any evidence which is authorizd by a warrant which in turn is supported by probable cause.
It's spying on the innocent or the masses without specific cause to spy on each individual which is a dangerous abuse of power.
Please do not rationalize away these basic protections of freedom.
wonder if the origin of the big bang could be pinpointed.
If by "origin" you mean "point of origin", then we already have that answer. The big bang was not an explosion which occurred at one point in space, spewing matter and energy out everywhere. The big bang was a big explosion OF space, and spewed out a glob of space which began to expand, making points more distant from each other.
So you cannot ask "where" the big bang occurred, because if you take all the points in space as far as can be seen, all of those points in space were at one single point at the moment of the big bang. So the best answer to "where" is "everywhere".
Wikipedia is something that the authors of the beginners guide can use to make sure that their facts are right
That's probably the worst possible use of Wikipedia in its current state of existence. "Facts" on Wikipedia should be regarded as a tentative starting place.
If the machine is outputting a paper ballot, how it produces that ballot is completely irrelevant.
And if you can walk into a voting machine booth, push a magic button combination, and cause it to print 200 paper ballots for your candidate, is it still irrelevant?
(Remember that many of these machines store the paper ballot internally like a receipt spool, visible through a glass plate, and thus it does not have to be "handed in".)
Amazing how folks' minds go to Paris. I would argue her thinking is not restricted at all.
According to the news, she will soon be experiencing some lower ceilings for a month or two. Perhaps this will constrain her future thinking a little more.
If they pull out of California because of that, they may as well just quit the election systems game altogether.
Diebold was already decertified in California and sued by the state on charges of fraud. I have heard nothing about recertification since then.
And yes, they might as well pull out of the election market. Just today I saw "Diebold" written on an ATM, and couldn't help but lose faith in the ATM.
Yes. What you say is correct and should be the ultimate test. But seeing the source code is a useful thing to check too. Sometimes source code is of such poor quality that you wouldn't trust it to count your spare change. If this is the case, then it's good to be able to see.
Also, you might want to check for security problems in the code. Yes, the printed ballot should be checked by the voter before accepting, but not every voter is perfect. It's nice to have multiple levels of error checking for something as important as voting.
the thing to remember is that it's the brake pedal that uses up fuel, not the gas.
In a standard car this does not strike me as a particularly insightful model of fuel efficiency. Coasting to a light is more fuel efficient if it means you didn't have to accelerate as much after the last light, or if it means the light will turn green before you get there so that you don't have to accelerate all the way from a stop.
If you're driving a regular (non-electric non-hybrid) car, are already up to full speed because it has been a while since your last stop, and are coming up to a stop sign with a mandatory stop, then it doesn't make much difference to fuel efficiency whether you coast to the stop sign or slam on the brake at the last minute. Strictly speaking, the brake uses up rubber, not fuel. You only save fuel by changing how much acceleration you have to do.
With the handful of cars that have electrical systems to feed energy back out of the braking system this is obviously a slightly different situation.
Slashdot Mirror
Except that people have been broiling meat for centuries, if not longer, and the basic principle of broiling meat is that the heat is transferred through thermal radiation.
So cooking meat in this way is hardly a new idea. Having a device to do it outside rather than inside is thus a trivial novelty, especially considering that it was probably first done outside anyway.
It wouldn't require 100. 20 out of 30 correct is statistically significant at the standard p 0.05 threshold.
Because people don't like surprises on their bill, don't want to estimate how much they've used, don't want to be calculating the cost of everything they want to do, and don't like to screw around with a complicated connection when simpler ones are available.
I presume it would be possible to recover the water if this were an issue. Upon burning hydrogen, water vapor is the byproduct.
Gasoline is about a fifth of a pound per mile you drive, so that isn't terribly far off. Although carrying 300 pounds of aluminum to your car would be more difficult than pumping 13 gallons of gasoline. Someone would have to come up with a convenient delivery method.
Don't be silly. Kibblemeters and bits have nothing to do with each other.
Except that scanning it in and including it as an email attachment is usually ineffective.
Don't you remember last week?
If they extend immunity to Dell, they can't make legal threats to Dell. It seems to me like Microsoft is a two-headed monster lately which can't agree with itself on how to attack.
Perhaps Microsoft patented the dying operating system.
For example, you can use duct tape to muffle fan noise...
And not only that, if you check the table in the linked article, not only does it change the estimates for pure gasoline engines, but the changes are proportional. The relative difference between the hybrid and pure gasoline cars is almost exactly the same under the new system as under the old. This raises the total estimated gasoline cost of driving both types of cars, which if anything, makes the hybrid cars MORE financially attractive, as gasoline cost is then estimated as a bigger fraction of the total cost of ownership.
Yes it is unreasonable. The next revolutionary war to regain the basic freedom to think what we want and organize anti-establishment political movements could result in a lot more bloodshed than 9/11 ever did. It's much safer for our children to keep those freedoms now than to let them be taken away, and as a nice bonus, they would get to live somewhere worth living.
Criminals and murderers have been operating in the U.S. for a very long time. Discarding the Bill of Rights because two buildings were knocked down is profoundly naive. Get a more realistic perspective of the relative importance of these two things.
How did reminding people that the highest law of the land supports basic personal freedom become naive???
Under what abuse of the English language is that not a search? Is requiring the Pony Express rider to hand over each letter of mine to be "scanned" not a search?
If this were being done with proper warrants, no one would be complaining. The Constitution already permits search and seizure of just about any evidence which is authorizd by a warrant which in turn is supported by probable cause.
It's spying on the innocent or the masses without specific cause to spy on each individual which is a dangerous abuse of power.
Please do not rationalize away these basic protections of freedom.
If by "origin" you mean "point of origin", then we already have that answer. The big bang was not an explosion which occurred at one point in space, spewing matter and energy out everywhere. The big bang was a big explosion OF space, and spewed out a glob of space which began to expand, making points more distant from each other.
So you cannot ask "where" the big bang occurred, because if you take all the points in space as far as can be seen, all of those points in space were at one single point at the moment of the big bang. So the best answer to "where" is "everywhere".
1. No profit!
That's probably the worst possible use of Wikipedia in its current state of existence. "Facts" on Wikipedia should be regarded as a tentative starting place.
Websites from people or organizations accidently distributing viruses are probably not the most insightful or useful websites anyway.
Then why does the engine keep spinning?
And if you can walk into a voting machine booth, push a magic button combination, and cause it to print 200 paper ballots for your candidate, is it still irrelevant?
(Remember that many of these machines store the paper ballot internally like a receipt spool, visible through a glass plate, and thus it does not have to be "handed in".)
According to the news, she will soon be experiencing some lower ceilings for a month or two. Perhaps this will constrain her future thinking a little more.
Yeah, well the victims of identity theft probably have the juries in their pocket on this one.
Diebold was already decertified in California and sued by the state on charges of fraud. I have heard nothing about recertification since then.
And yes, they might as well pull out of the election market. Just today I saw "Diebold" written on an ATM, and couldn't help but lose faith in the ATM.
Yes. What you say is correct and should be the ultimate test. But seeing the source code is a useful thing to check too. Sometimes source code is of such poor quality that you wouldn't trust it to count your spare change. If this is the case, then it's good to be able to see.
Also, you might want to check for security problems in the code. Yes, the printed ballot should be checked by the voter before accepting, but not every voter is perfect. It's nice to have multiple levels of error checking for something as important as voting.
The Ford Airstream looks like a mix between a tin can and a tinker toy.
:)
And the Ford stock chart looks like an exponential decay.
Perhaps this is not the best example company.
In a standard car this does not strike me as a particularly insightful model of fuel efficiency. Coasting to a light is more fuel efficient if it means you didn't have to accelerate as much after the last light, or if it means the light will turn green before you get there so that you don't have to accelerate all the way from a stop.
If you're driving a regular (non-electric non-hybrid) car, are already up to full speed because it has been a while since your last stop, and are coming up to a stop sign with a mandatory stop, then it doesn't make much difference to fuel efficiency whether you coast to the stop sign or slam on the brake at the last minute. Strictly speaking, the brake uses up rubber, not fuel. You only save fuel by changing how much acceleration you have to do.
With the handful of cars that have electrical systems to feed energy back out of the braking system this is obviously a slightly different situation.