If it is then the Armageddon is overdue. We've had these custom personalised plates for a while.
Who's we? Somewhere else in Oz? Here in the states, the wackiest symbols I can think of are on the California "KIDS" plates, which offer hand, heart, star or plus sign symbols, only one of which can be used only once on your plates. Many states also have specialty plates with a variety of backgrounds, or with one special image printed on the plate next to the characters.
Mazda is ditching touch screens and going back to physical controls, and that's not going to save them money unless they reuse the same controls across many models, or reuse controls from some other automaker. They are including a HUD, though. Probably that can be reprogrammed, but since it's Mazda, they never will.
Physical controls are superior in lots of ways, though. At minimum, you should have them for the lights/signals, wipers, HVAC, and the audio volume. Well, that and the steering, brakes, and throttle:)
Many other cars have a channel around the inside of the boot lid that catches the water that runs off the lid when you open it,
My 1998 Audi A8 has the same problem, and that was a flagship vehicle built by an experienced automaker. The gutter is small and easily catches crap which affects its operation, so if you're not garaging the vehicle, you can easily get a bunch of water in the trunk. My 1982 MBZ 300SD is much better. Tesla is in good company here.
You might as well say that because the energy was ultimately derived from the sun, coal is really just solar power.
They're not the same at all, and I'll tell you why: The purpose of my statement is to recognize the value of my land, while the purpose of the statement that all power is essentially solar power is to misdirect and mislead. My very point is that we must maintain the land, because our welfare is based upon it as surely as our homes.
We live on the land though, and that should be good enough reason to keep it in good condition.
Oh, so you did get my point. So what are you complaining about?
The Green New Deal was full of all manner of handouts and other ideological bullshit that has absolutely nothing to do with humanity being better stewards of the earth.
Read is apparently unaware of past legal precedent indicating that the federal government has the legal ability to regulate pollutants
California's state legislature regularly passes laws regarding pollutants, so do several others. This "apparently unaware" dig is just a form of ad hominem attack.
No, and also no. You are apparently unaware that California is the only state which is permitted to set atmospheric emissions standards, because we've been doing it for so long and by the time the feds thought about arguing about it, it was too late. Other states are only permitted to choose whether they adopt California's standard, or the federal standard.
We're talking about a man who has deliberately chosen to wear a brown suit and orange shirt on his official photograph, along with an expression that suggests he has more than one problem with gas emissions.
Perhaps he was emboldened by another man, who wears an orange spray tan and a tribble, and who subsists on fried chicken, emergency omelets, and hamberders.
Mostly because people stumbled on shale gas, which replaced a bunch of coal. There's no real policy behind it, and it can easily reverse again when the gas starts running out.
Stumbled on it by fracking, which means pumping refinery wastes into the ground and pounding on them in order to hydraulically hammer the rock until it fractures, which could never EVER have any negative repercussions, right? The fossil fuel industry is fractally evil.
When I read about the black snow in Siberia or how some authorities are "painting" white the contamination for it not to be seen, I realize how short minded they are. They only can see immediate returns and have no idea what they are doing to their own familiars and descendants.
I believe that at least some of them understand that AGW is real, but they believe that there's nothing we can do about it, so they figure they might as well play hospice nurse to humanity. Unfortunately, I also believe that some of them believe that it's their responsibility to bring people "closer to god" as rapidly as possible. Either way, those who have no good ideas should get the hell out of the way and let those who have at least try them out. If you're falling off a cliff, you might as well try to fly, or at least land on something soft.
"Even w/rising levels, isn't CO2 still only on the order of 0.05% of all atmospheric gases by volume?"
Yes, but so what? If you get near a point, make it.
"Observation vs Concept"
Not watching a video, get real. If you can't make your point in a few sentences, you don't know what you're talking about. We can observe the properties of co2, both atmospherically and in the lab, and conclude that a notable percentage increase will have a significant effect. Get the concept yet?
"Ignoring federal weapons regulations? Nope Ignoring federal emissions regulations? Nope Ignoring federal drug regulations? Fine"
The federal standard is that citizens have the right to keep and bear arms, specifically military weaponry. California ignores that. But there is also the standard that most of the country fears California already (they're harboring immigrants! They're coming for my gas guzzler! They're coming for my guns!) So nobody wants to force the issue, because what's scarier than Californians with pulpits and pens? Californians with pulpits, pens, and guns!
The federal standard for emissions regulations is a bit of a mixed bag. The EPA was created by Nixon, who may have had his head up his ass, but who seemed to care about the future of the nation. Today, Cheeto Mussolini is doing his best to destroy it, because he doesn't. California instituted stricter emissions regulations than the feds because we needed them. Asthma rates were rising fast, children in la county had bleeding lesions on their lungs, and so on. There are ways the CARB could be less abusive, but ironically they would also have to be MORE strict in other ways, limiting still further what it's legal to sell as opposed to what's legal to do in the aftermarket. Industry is capable of profiting under such rules; for example, all automakers selling vehicles in America were capable of EXCEEDING the CAFE targets, not just meeting them. But his orangeness decided they were too strict anyway. Meanwhile, all of those companies have to produce less-polluting vehicles for the rest of the world anyway, so they are saving zero dollars on R&D.
Finally, the federal standard for drug criminalization is supposed to be based on both hazard and benefit. By their own rules, for example, cannabis should be less heavily regulated than cough syrup, or indeed, alcohol.
So, tell us again all about who is ignoring what, because it seems like all the ignorance not displayed in your argument is being promoted by the federal government.
"There are really 4 or even 5 groups in this debate:"
You forgot one, the trolls. They make claims like that the social engineers want everyone to "live off the land". But all wealth is derived from the land, so we all live off the land already. What they want is for people to live sustainably. That does mean changes to personal habits for the majority of people, but it only necessarily means large changes for the most wasteful, which is to say the 1% and above, with those furthest above having to make the largest changes. The people at the bottom have the least to do.
This is why meltdown is important. There have historically been lots of ways to sneak code onto users' computers. We like to think protected memory will, uh, protect us. But since it won't, these things are important.
Rendering passwords without using the system font libraries (or GUI text widgets) solves the problem of being able to grab the data from the OS. There have long been password deobfuscation tools, my favorite used to be snadboy's revelation but I don't think that works any more. Helped me a lot back in the xp days, though. But being able to read another process' supposedly protected memory is a whole other level.
First, it doesn't matter what you call it, if you have too much, it's a problem. You can call it peaches and it won't change its effects.
Second, there is no such thing as blasphemy against chemistry or physics, which is what life is. Blasphemy only has meaning in religion.
Third, to pollute is to render harmful through inclusion, and adding more co2 to the atmosphere renders it harmful on multiple levels, so co2 is actually a pollutant by a reasonable definition. But as per point the first, it really doesn't matter if you call it a pollutant. What matters is that we know co2 to be a greenhouse gas, and we know that GHGs promote global warming. We also know that last time co2 was this high, Earth wouldn't have been a nice place for humans. We also know that this rate of co2 rise is unprecedented. We also know that adding energy to a system produces effects, and that climate is a chaotic system. We know that our species has enjoyed a period of climatological stability, and that our actions are perturbing that stability.
Tldr you're arguing about whether we're about to be eaten by alligators or crocodiles, and it's a meaningless argument.
You can choose your level of control, with your wallet. You can buy a phone without crapware (e.g. Android One) or you can buy a phone with an unlockable bootloader. Can't get that from Apple. Or you can take a subsidized phone shoveled full of bullshit, which is much cheaper than getting it from Apple.
the reality of fragmented piecemeal OEM-controlled OS you can't do anything but jailbreak anyway.
Whut? The reality is, you're not making any sense.
At least Apple half-assed a wall around the garden for the rubes.
A half-assed wall is no wall at all. Just ask China.
But seriously, can I take an entire 10+ minute video, overlay my commentary, and not expect a copyright infringement notice? That does seem like a stretch. I thought that 30-seconds was the court-established precedent for fair use.
There is no such standard. Indeed, there is no standard for time. The supposed standard is as much as necessary. If you're commenting on the whole thing, then the whole thing may be necessary. In practice, who's got more money for lawyers?
Every time someone watched the commentary version, the original publisher gets nothing. That doesn't seem fair.
If someone wants to see the original without commentary over it, they can go watch it, and then the original publisher may get something.
I live in the emerald triangle, wouldn't you like to know? What half-dozen webpages do you have open, geocities? No wait, the gif animations on there would use at least a gig by themselves.
Would I get in trouble for posting such a video, if "someone" says this is sexually suggestive?
If you don't monetize the video, you probably won't have a problem. It's the threat to their income streams that galvanized Youtube. It's not like they actually give a shit about your kids, or anyone else's.
4GB is plenty for Android, but for Linux? Nope. I realize I'm at risk of becoming "that guy" who is always whining about RAM, but it really is a sticking point for getting things done.
Slashdot Mirror
If it is then the Armageddon is overdue. We've had these custom personalised plates for a while.
Who's we? Somewhere else in Oz? Here in the states, the wackiest symbols I can think of are on the California "KIDS" plates, which offer hand, heart, star or plus sign symbols, only one of which can be used only once on your plates. Many states also have specialty plates with a variety of backgrounds, or with one special image printed on the plate next to the characters.
Vaseline also works -- it's even deniable. You touched the screen with greasy hands...
Cinnabon glaze. I'm gonna have some on my fingers anyway.
Barring that, looks like we've found another use for nose grease.
Mazda is ditching touch screens and going back to physical controls, and that's not going to save them money unless they reuse the same controls across many models, or reuse controls from some other automaker. They are including a HUD, though. Probably that can be reprogrammed, but since it's Mazda, they never will.
Physical controls are superior in lots of ways, though. At minimum, you should have them for the lights/signals, wipers, HVAC, and the audio volume. Well, that and the steering, brakes, and throttle :)
Actually you could be surprised how many relatively trivial repair jobs could require removing the intake manifold
Had to pull it to do crankcase breather hoses on my A8... and that engine is longitudinally mounted.
Many other cars have a channel around the inside of the boot lid that catches the water that runs off the lid when you open it,
My 1998 Audi A8 has the same problem, and that was a flagship vehicle built by an experienced automaker. The gutter is small and easily catches crap which affects its operation, so if you're not garaging the vehicle, you can easily get a bunch of water in the trunk. My 1982 MBZ 300SD is much better. Tesla is in good company here.
Me? I've turned off my data plan and now pay under $20/mo, if and when I choose to bring my cell with me. All hail Ned Ludd!
My new phone plan is going to be $20/mo, too! And no 5G, so nobody will ever spy on me! All hail Google Fi! Er, wait...
That's a gross oversimplification.
It's actually a factual overview.
You might as well say that because the energy was ultimately derived from the sun, coal is really just solar power.
They're not the same at all, and I'll tell you why: The purpose of my statement is to recognize the value of my land, while the purpose of the statement that all power is essentially solar power is to misdirect and mislead. My very point is that we must maintain the land, because our welfare is based upon it as surely as our homes.
We live on the land though, and that should be good enough reason to keep it in good condition.
Oh, so you did get my point. So what are you complaining about?
The Green New Deal was full of all manner of handouts and other ideological bullshit that has absolutely nothing to do with humanity being better stewards of the earth.
Such as?
The argument will be that greenhouse gas regulations (like many air pollution regulations) fall under the Interstate Commerce Clause.
That's probably correct, although one could also cite promotion of the general welfare.
Read is apparently unaware of past legal precedent indicating that the federal government has the legal ability to regulate pollutants
California's state legislature regularly passes laws regarding pollutants, so do several others. This "apparently unaware" dig is just a form of ad hominem attack.
No, and also no. You are apparently unaware that California is the only state which is permitted to set atmospheric emissions standards, because we've been doing it for so long and by the time the feds thought about arguing about it, it was too late. Other states are only permitted to choose whether they adopt California's standard, or the federal standard.
We're talking about a man who has deliberately chosen to wear a brown suit and orange shirt on his official photograph, along with an expression that suggests he has more than one problem with gas emissions.
Perhaps he was emboldened by another man, who wears an orange spray tan and a tribble, and who subsists on fried chicken, emergency omelets, and hamberders.
Mostly because people stumbled on shale gas, which replaced a bunch of coal. There's no real policy behind it, and it can easily reverse again when the gas starts running out.
Stumbled on it by fracking, which means pumping refinery wastes into the ground and pounding on them in order to hydraulically hammer the rock until it fractures, which could never EVER have any negative repercussions, right? The fossil fuel industry is fractally evil.
When I read about the black snow in Siberia or how some authorities are "painting" white the contamination for it not to be seen, I realize how short minded they are. They only can see immediate returns and have no idea what they are doing to their own familiars and descendants.
I believe that at least some of them understand that AGW is real, but they believe that there's nothing we can do about it, so they figure they might as well play hospice nurse to humanity. Unfortunately, I also believe that some of them believe that it's their responsibility to bring people "closer to god" as rapidly as possible. Either way, those who have no good ideas should get the hell out of the way and let those who have at least try them out. If you're falling off a cliff, you might as well try to fly, or at least land on something soft.
I'm sure Oracle is expert at spotting fraud. Just compare to themselves...
"Even w/rising levels, isn't CO2 still only on the order of 0.05% of all atmospheric gases by volume?"
Yes, but so what? If you get near a point, make it.
"Observation vs Concept"
Not watching a video, get real. If you can't make your point in a few sentences, you don't know what you're talking about. We can observe the properties of co2, both atmospherically and in the lab, and conclude that a notable percentage increase will have a significant effect. Get the concept yet?
"Ignoring federal weapons regulations? Nope Ignoring federal emissions regulations? Nope Ignoring federal drug regulations? Fine"
The federal standard is that citizens have the right to keep and bear arms, specifically military weaponry. California ignores that. But there is also the standard that most of the country fears California already (they're harboring immigrants! They're coming for my gas guzzler! They're coming for my guns!) So nobody wants to force the issue, because what's scarier than Californians with pulpits and pens? Californians with pulpits, pens, and guns!
The federal standard for emissions regulations is a bit of a mixed bag. The EPA was created by Nixon, who may have had his head up his ass, but who seemed to care about the future of the nation. Today, Cheeto Mussolini is doing his best to destroy it, because he doesn't. California instituted stricter emissions regulations than the feds because we needed them. Asthma rates were rising fast, children in la county had bleeding lesions on their lungs, and so on. There are ways the CARB could be less abusive, but ironically they would also have to be MORE strict in other ways, limiting still further what it's legal to sell as opposed to what's legal to do in the aftermarket. Industry is capable of profiting under such rules; for example, all automakers selling vehicles in America were capable of EXCEEDING the CAFE targets, not just meeting them. But his orangeness decided they were too strict anyway. Meanwhile, all of those companies have to produce less-polluting vehicles for the rest of the world anyway, so they are saving zero dollars on R&D.
Finally, the federal standard for drug criminalization is supposed to be based on both hazard and benefit. By their own rules, for example, cannabis should be less heavily regulated than cough syrup, or indeed, alcohol.
So, tell us again all about who is ignoring what, because it seems like all the ignorance not displayed in your argument is being promoted by the federal government.
"There are really 4 or even 5 groups in this debate:"
You forgot one, the trolls. They make claims like that the social engineers want everyone to "live off the land". But all wealth is derived from the land, so we all live off the land already. What they want is for people to live sustainably. That does mean changes to personal habits for the majority of people, but it only necessarily means large changes for the most wasteful, which is to say the 1% and above, with those furthest above having to make the largest changes. The people at the bottom have the least to do.
This is why meltdown is important. There have historically been lots of ways to sneak code onto users' computers. We like to think protected memory will, uh, protect us. But since it won't, these things are important.
Rendering passwords without using the system font libraries (or GUI text widgets) solves the problem of being able to grab the data from the OS. There have long been password deobfuscation tools, my favorite used to be snadboy's revelation but I don't think that works any more. Helped me a lot back in the xp days, though. But being able to read another process' supposedly protected memory is a whole other level.
That was a cool comment until the part where you hit submit before telling us which one it is.
First, it doesn't matter what you call it, if you have too much, it's a problem. You can call it peaches and it won't change its effects.
Second, there is no such thing as blasphemy against chemistry or physics, which is what life is. Blasphemy only has meaning in religion.
Third, to pollute is to render harmful through inclusion, and adding more co2 to the atmosphere renders it harmful on multiple levels, so co2 is actually a pollutant by a reasonable definition. But as per point the first, it really doesn't matter if you call it a pollutant. What matters is that we know co2 to be a greenhouse gas, and we know that GHGs promote global warming. We also know that last time co2 was this high, Earth wouldn't have been a nice place for humans. We also know that this rate of co2 rise is unprecedented. We also know that adding energy to a system produces effects, and that climate is a chaotic system. We know that our species has enjoyed a period of climatological stability, and that our actions are perturbing that stability.
Tldr you're arguing about whether we're about to be eaten by alligators or crocodiles, and it's a meaningless argument.
The illusion of control,
You can choose your level of control, with your wallet. You can buy a phone without crapware (e.g. Android One) or you can buy a phone with an unlockable bootloader. Can't get that from Apple. Or you can take a subsidized phone shoveled full of bullshit, which is much cheaper than getting it from Apple.
the reality of fragmented piecemeal OEM-controlled OS you can't do anything but jailbreak anyway.
Whut? The reality is, you're not making any sense.
At least Apple half-assed a wall around the garden for the rubes.
A half-assed wall is no wall at all. Just ask China.
But seriously, can I take an entire 10+ minute video, overlay my commentary, and not expect a copyright infringement notice? That does seem like a stretch. I thought that 30-seconds was the court-established precedent for fair use.
There is no such standard. Indeed, there is no standard for time. The supposed standard is as much as necessary. If you're commenting on the whole thing, then the whole thing may be necessary. In practice, who's got more money for lawyers?
Every time someone watched the commentary version, the original publisher gets nothing. That doesn't seem fair.
If someone wants to see the original without commentary over it, they can go watch it, and then the original publisher may get something.
I live in the emerald triangle, wouldn't you like to know? What half-dozen webpages do you have open, geocities? No wait, the gif animations on there would use at least a gig by themselves.
My budget-ass phone has 3GB. 4GB is a bad joke.
Would I get in trouble for posting such a video, if "someone" says this is sexually suggestive?
If you don't monetize the video, you probably won't have a problem. It's the threat to their income streams that galvanized Youtube. It's not like they actually give a shit about your kids, or anyone else's.
4GB is plenty for Android, but for Linux? Nope. I realize I'm at risk of becoming "that guy" who is always whining about RAM, but it really is a sticking point for getting things done.
I use friendly because it allows me to access the messaging tab [...]
Does Metal allows that?
Yep, just double-checked to make sure it still works, too, and it does. That's why I landed on this particular client.