I've got an '02 Camaro Z28 SS that recently saw its best-ever mileage at around 47K miles, getting ~27mpg on a trip from roughly Los Angeles to Laughlin, NV, and about 26mpg on the way back, in both cases at about 85mph most of the way. Even relatively young, the average mileage on long trips was about 24-25mpg.
Not necessarily. WalMart could actually lose out, depending on what the consumer wants. Many people shop at WalMart solely because of the low prices. I tend to shop at Target or Sears rather than WalMart specifically because I have more room to move around in Target, even if I pay slightly more. (The only think I buy at WalMart with any semblance of regularity is ammunition when I decide that I want to go shooting and don't have much on-hand. It's usually early in the morning, so there are fewer customers there, and I know I can go straight to the one area, pick and pay, and walk right out.) WalMart would not be able to compete on price, but would have to work on selection (which they have) and atmosphere (which they often lack).
Walmart doesn't sell below cost, they buy in such huge bulk that they can profitably sell for mere pennies over cost.
But WalMart still sets their own prices. They may sell for eight cents over or twelve cents under their costs, but that is WalMart's call. The worry here is that WalMart would be forced to sell, say, a shirt at $14.98 even if they want to sell it for $6.92, or a mower for $149.99 even if they wanted to price it at $105.96.\
Substitute the name of your favorite local mom-n-pop for 'WalMart.'
I bring virtually none of my personal life to work, save for the occasional call I take from my mother, and even then it's on a personal cell and kept to a minimum. No family member or friend has my desk or cell number (and the desk number is printed incorrectly in the directory, something I've not corrected in three years, so they wouldn't be able to call and discover it), nor my e-mail address. A couple of them have seen the physical location where I work because I've pointed it out driving by, but I doubt they remember where it is. At work, only HR and my direct manager have my home numbers. I have no photos or personal documents at work aside from certification information on the wall (the latter only because it quiets a few particular people), nor do I keep personal files on any system. If I were to walk in and find out that I no longer had a job, I would be able to put down my work cell and my badge, pick up my keys and personal cell, take down the certs and put them under my arm, and walk out the door holding everything that is mine.
On top of all of that, personal time is mine. When I walk out the door, I'm on my time. At lunch, I do what I please -- which is usually eating a small lunch and taking a 15-minute nap in the car. I answer e-mails only if a response is urgently needed, and the general culture is to never call someone once they've left the building unless it's critical, and there's an unspoken agreement that if someone is in the break room or a particular area outside, they don't get bothered unless it's critical, so I have few concerns about that.
I am not antisocial, and get along well with everyone at work, having lunch with one or more of them once or twice a week. Some people bring in all manner of decorations for their cubicles, with photos and even the odd painting. I wallpaper mine with functional security posters and TCP/IP diagrams. It's simply a choice of where to draw the line, and how heavily it is drawn.
Collecting an e-mail address falls under COPPA, as I understand it, and since most forums require an e-mail address to validate one's identity, it has to be collected. COPPA is an annoyance that is easily avoided, but if it becomes clear to the administrator that a forum member is below the age of 13, failure to act can result in the admin getting in trouble. I'm not aware of this ever happening, but the possibility is there. COPA, OTOH, isn't what I would call a 'dark specter' for most forums, which often bar posting of pornographic material. There are cases where it can become onerous, but these are probably less common than some may think.
This law has been the dark specter over every forum I've seen for years, and many non-communication-related services, too.
Are you sure you're not confusing COPA with COPPA? Both can apply to forums, but COPPA is a more constant point, requiring that forum admins collect parental permission from potential users age 12 or under.
Linus has very clearly stated that the kernel is licensed under GPLv2 (not 'GPLv2 or later,' as many programs are), and that he has no intentions of moving the kernel to GPLv3.
This is the original Audigy, as that's what I had before getting the newest Audigy for my rebuilt rig a few months ago, and the time I'm thinking of happened around Windows XP's release. Royal pain to deal with, enough that I made sure I had a couple of copies of that Compaq CD around just in case.
On a side note, I do appreciate those employees such as yourself that were clearly testing the borders of Creative's acceptable support policies. There were a few of you that as I recall were damn near worshiped for actually caring about the customers.
The original Audigy drivers were not available in a complete form from the main website. The solution, as detailed by a Creative employee in their forums, was to download a giant file (250MB or more, IIRC) from Compaq that contained the base CD, extract the contents, change a file or two around, and then it would work. It was basically Creative passing their bandwidth bill off to a bigger company.
I wasn't attempting to address global warming, just the assertion that the US winter was much warmer than usual, and more specifically countering an attempt to suggest that NOAA said as much when NOAA really said that it was fairly average. I prefer to use source information instead of news reports, as the parent to my post had done.
"The December 2006-February 2007 winter season temperature was marked by periods of unusually warm and cold conditions in the U.S., but the overall seasonal temperature was near average, according to scientists at NOAA's National Climatic Data Center in Asheville, N.C." (emphasis added)
Dell can afford those specialized techs. Not everyone can, especially if the critical systems number only one or two out of a couple dozen servers, thereby making an on-site Linux guru an expensive luxury.
People running mission-critical systems that require rapid, on-demand support where a newsgroup just won't suffice rely on Red Hat (or Sun, who is in a similar position) to provide defined support.
You're thinking mostly home. Think full-scale enterprise, like I have to. It takes very little to saturate the links, especially when you factor in how much of the operations are now handled over the network. It's not just a few e-mails; Outlook can consume significant bandwidth (as can any client that keeps at least a copy client-side), and many companies require all data to be kept on network shares. Throw in roaming profiles and group policy-based software installations (even using BITS), and you can eat up wireless bandwidth very quickly.
The ability to match wire speeds for numerous users is going to be a huge benefit to companies that want to deploy wireless for something other than convenience in the conference rooms. Even when using a proper channel layout, even using 802.11a, you still have bandwidth contention within a channel on a single AP, and it mars the experience for the general user. Splitting higher bandwidth will assist in alleviating these issues.
"And because the atmosphere is less dense at higher altitudes, the debris is likely to stay in space a long time because it will not be slowed down by friction with the atmosphere, which causes it to lose energy and burn up more quickly. Debris created during the Chinese test is thought to have reached lower altitudes - about 4000 km - but is expected to stay in space for hundreds of thousands of years."
The line is unsourced, but IME, New Scientist is good enough with the facts to be usable.
The problem with that is that it's unrealistic. Debris from the Chinese test is expected to remain in orbit for thousands of years. Pop enough satellites in a major war, and space may truly become unusable for decades or centuries. I suspect that if it came down to it, we'd soft-kill enemy satellites. The ABL is going to be ready for use in a couple of years, and it might be suitable for taking out an enemy satellite without shattering it.
We know the range of space where the asteroid might be. Matching that with where we know the Earth will be allows us the ability to figure out the range of locations where it might hit. You are correct, though, that the information is recalled from something that I read elsewhere.
Apophis has to thread a comparatively very tiny needle -- the area through which it must fly is about 400m across, IIRC. The chances that it will do this are slim, but because our observations and math don't provide the precision required in this multi-body gravitational system, we have to continue waiting to see where it will go.
All modern cards get binary blobs of proprietary firmware that is loaded by the driver. It's an FCC requirement of all software radios that is intended to limit the use of the radios outside of the intended use. Older wireless NICs used hardware radios, and so had no such requirements. Atheros has been a software radio for some time, and has worked well with the MADWifi project to provide the HAL required for the drivers.
This was going to be a major problem with the attempt to block kernel tainting in 2008, because legally, there was no way around having wireless drivers taint the kernel due to their use of the proprietary HAL.
I believe you refer to Apophis, the asteroid that will pass within about 35,000km of Earth in 2029. It will make another pass by the Earth in 2036, and has a 1:50,000 chance of striking somewhere between the Kamchatka Peninsula and Venzuela. Apophis was named after the Greek spelling of the Egyptian god Apep the Destroyer.
The document you reference explicitly states that the CIA was financing the Afghan fighters, and that Arab fighters were financed from Arab sources. I'm not sure where in there it says that the CIA was supplying Arab fighters money even through middlemen, as that suggestion is denied by al Qaeda second-in-command Ayman al-Zawahiri, Algerian-born Arab organizer Abdullah Anas, Pakistan ISI Brigadier Mohammad Yousaf, and by several people from within the CIA who were hands-on with the efforts to support the mujahedeen.
Actually, I do. The following is from a post I made elsewhere. It was written a few years ago with the best then-available information regarding the US inventory (though I forget the source of the counts, I used nuclear weapons blast effects calculator, which seems to be reasonably accurate), and since then two more Ohio-class submarines have been withdrawn for conversion to cruise-missile platforms.
The US Navy has 16 Ohio-class subs available right now (two of those are scheduled for retrofitting to carry Tomahawks and two others are already undergoing or prepping to undergo this conversion). Twelve of those carry the Polaris D5 missile, and the remaining four carry the Polaris C4 missile. The D5 is capable of handling up to eight warheads, while the C4 can handle six. Of the 2880 warheads thus deployable (assuming all Ohios sailed at the same time), 2496 are W76 warheads with yields of 100kT, while the remaining 384 are W88 warheads with yields of 475kT.
The Navy also has 320 nuclear-armed Tomahawk cruise missiles in its inventory, though none are deployed. Each of these carries a W80-0 warhead (150kT yield).
The Air Force's ICBM inventory includes 150 Minuteman III with single W62 warheads (170kT yield), 50 with three W62 warheads, and 300 with three W78 warheads (335kT yield). There are fewer than 40 Peacekeeper MX missiles, each with 10 W87 warheads (300kT yield).
The Air Force's inventory also includes 430 ALCM (Air-Launched Cruise Missile) and 430 ACM (Advanced Cruise Missile), each capable of carrying a single W80-1 warhead (150kT yield). There are also 800 B61 (variable yield, from 0.3kT to 170kT) and 650 B83 gravity bombs (variable yield, from 30kT to 1200kT). There are other weapons scattered about for various reasons, mostly semi-deployed, but scheduled for collection and dismantling, so we'll leave those out of our calculations.
So, we have the following warheads/weapons, their counts/maximum yields/radius for near-certain death/radius for widespread destruction of buildings/radius of third-degree burns/area of widespread damage:
B61 series -- 800/170kT/1500m/4000m/5600m/551 sq km
B83 -- 650/1200kT/2900m/7700m/12,600m/6284 sq km
W62 -- 300/170kT/1500m/4000m/5600m/551 sq km
W76 -- 2496/100kT/1300m/3400m/4500m/286 sq km
W78 -- 900/335kT/1900m/5000m/7400m/1273 sq km
W80-0 -- 320/150kT/1500m/3900m/5400m/495 sq km
W80-1 -- 860/150kT/1500m/3900m/5400m/495 sq km
W87 -- 400/300kT/1800m/4900m/7100m/1124 sq km
W88 -- 384/475kT/2100m/5600m/8600m/1998 sq km
For conversion purposes, 1000m = 0.6214 miles, and 1 sq. km. = 0.3861 sq. mi.
So we get a total area of near-certain death, assuming optimal air burst altitude and flat terrain conditions, of 8,351,188 square kilometers. The Russian arsenal is probably about the same, so we can call it, for sake of convenience, 17 million square kilometers. The world's land surface area is about 149 million square kilometers, and the total area is 510 million square kilometers. Thus, we have the capability to have 11.4% of the world's land mass fall into the 'wide-spread third-degree burns' category, but only 3.3% of the total world's area including oceans. We could have some effect, but it would not kill everything.
This doesn't include fallout effects, of course, as that's a much more complex issue, and would produce more effects than the initial detonations. However, Chernobyl has shown us that the effects of fallout don't always match our worst expectations (realizing that Chernobyl didn't throw as much mass into the air as would a nuclear warhead's explosion), so I don't think that the worst fears of fallout would be realized. Humanity would even survive and probably be able to rebuild some of the cities after a wait of perhaps only a few years, maybe decades.
If Iran is being so forthright, then why did the IAEA report Iran to the UNSC for potential noncompliance? Among the issues in the August 2006 report:
Iran failed to provide adequate explanations for the presence of uranium enriched to much higher grades than required for nuclear plant operation.
Iran has failed to provide adequate explanations for the source of the P-1 and P-2 centrifuges, which are suspected to have sourced from A.Q. Khan.
Iran has refused to release a document "describing the procedures for the reduction of UF6 to uranium metal and the casting and machining of enriched and depleted uranium metal into hemispheres." Iran offered to allow the IAEA to review the document under seal in Iran and to take notes, but then during the review decided that notes would not be permitted, and required the destruction of existing notes.
Iran declined to provide one-year multiple-entry visas to certain inspectors in violation of its Safeguards agreements with the IAEA, until the matter was brought to more public notice in August, at which point it started granting them.
These are just a few of the issues in the IAEA report itself. Iran is certainly being more forthcoming than Saddam Hussein ever was, but they're not as accommodating as Libya became, which is what the West is generally after.
China only has a few hundred nuclear weapons, and only 25-50 ICBMs. By the time a war starts with China, it may be up by another two dozen or so through SLBMs, but China's nuclear arsenal is a pittance compared to that of the US.
Slashdot Mirror
I've got an '02 Camaro Z28 SS that recently saw its best-ever mileage at around 47K miles, getting ~27mpg on a trip from roughly Los Angeles to Laughlin, NV, and about 26mpg on the way back, in both cases at about 85mph most of the way. Even relatively young, the average mileage on long trips was about 24-25mpg.
Not necessarily. WalMart could actually lose out, depending on what the consumer wants. Many people shop at WalMart solely because of the low prices. I tend to shop at Target or Sears rather than WalMart specifically because I have more room to move around in Target, even if I pay slightly more. (The only think I buy at WalMart with any semblance of regularity is ammunition when I decide that I want to go shooting and don't have much on-hand. It's usually early in the morning, so there are fewer customers there, and I know I can go straight to the one area, pick and pay, and walk right out.) WalMart would not be able to compete on price, but would have to work on selection (which they have) and atmosphere (which they often lack).
Walmart doesn't sell below cost, they buy in such huge bulk that they can profitably sell for mere pennies over cost.
But WalMart still sets their own prices. They may sell for eight cents over or twelve cents under their costs, but that is WalMart's call. The worry here is that WalMart would be forced to sell, say, a shirt at $14.98 even if they want to sell it for $6.92, or a mower for $149.99 even if they wanted to price it at $105.96.\
Substitute the name of your favorite local mom-n-pop for 'WalMart.'
I bring virtually none of my personal life to work, save for the occasional call I take from my mother, and even then it's on a personal cell and kept to a minimum. No family member or friend has my desk or cell number (and the desk number is printed incorrectly in the directory, something I've not corrected in three years, so they wouldn't be able to call and discover it), nor my e-mail address. A couple of them have seen the physical location where I work because I've pointed it out driving by, but I doubt they remember where it is. At work, only HR and my direct manager have my home numbers. I have no photos or personal documents at work aside from certification information on the wall (the latter only because it quiets a few particular people), nor do I keep personal files on any system. If I were to walk in and find out that I no longer had a job, I would be able to put down my work cell and my badge, pick up my keys and personal cell, take down the certs and put them under my arm, and walk out the door holding everything that is mine.
On top of all of that, personal time is mine. When I walk out the door, I'm on my time. At lunch, I do what I please -- which is usually eating a small lunch and taking a 15-minute nap in the car. I answer e-mails only if a response is urgently needed, and the general culture is to never call someone once they've left the building unless it's critical, and there's an unspoken agreement that if someone is in the break room or a particular area outside, they don't get bothered unless it's critical, so I have few concerns about that.
I am not antisocial, and get along well with everyone at work, having lunch with one or more of them once or twice a week. Some people bring in all manner of decorations for their cubicles, with photos and even the odd painting. I wallpaper mine with functional security posters and TCP/IP diagrams. It's simply a choice of where to draw the line, and how heavily it is drawn.
Collecting an e-mail address falls under COPPA, as I understand it, and since most forums require an e-mail address to validate one's identity, it has to be collected. COPPA is an annoyance that is easily avoided, but if it becomes clear to the administrator that a forum member is below the age of 13, failure to act can result in the admin getting in trouble. I'm not aware of this ever happening, but the possibility is there. COPA, OTOH, isn't what I would call a 'dark specter' for most forums, which often bar posting of pornographic material. There are cases where it can become onerous, but these are probably less common than some may think.
This law has been the dark specter over every forum I've seen for years, and many non-communication-related services, too.
Are you sure you're not confusing COPA with COPPA? Both can apply to forums, but COPPA is a more constant point, requiring that forum admins collect parental permission from potential users age 12 or under.
I was correcting that, and only that.
Linus has very clearly stated that the kernel is licensed under GPLv2 (not 'GPLv2 or later,' as many programs are), and that he has no intentions of moving the kernel to GPLv3.
This is the original Audigy, as that's what I had before getting the newest Audigy for my rebuilt rig a few months ago, and the time I'm thinking of happened around Windows XP's release. Royal pain to deal with, enough that I made sure I had a couple of copies of that Compaq CD around just in case.
On a side note, I do appreciate those employees such as yourself that were clearly testing the borders of Creative's acceptable support policies. There were a few of you that as I recall were damn near worshiped for actually caring about the customers.
The original Audigy drivers were not available in a complete form from the main website. The solution, as detailed by a Creative employee in their forums, was to download a giant file (250MB or more, IIRC) from Compaq that contained the base CD, extract the contents, change a file or two around, and then it would work. It was basically Creative passing their bandwidth bill off to a bigger company.
I wasn't attempting to address global warming, just the assertion that the US winter was much warmer than usual, and more specifically countering an attempt to suggest that NOAA said as much when NOAA really said that it was fairly average. I prefer to use source information instead of news reports, as the parent to my post had done.
From NOAA:
"The December 2006-February 2007 winter season temperature was marked by periods of unusually warm and cold conditions in the U.S., but the overall seasonal temperature was near average, according to scientists at NOAA's National Climatic Data Center in Asheville, N.C." (emphasis added)
Maybe it will give us some more room to work on global warming...
Dell can afford those specialized techs. Not everyone can, especially if the critical systems number only one or two out of a couple dozen servers, thereby making an on-site Linux guru an expensive luxury.
People running mission-critical systems that require rapid, on-demand support where a newsgroup just won't suffice rely on Red Hat (or Sun, who is in a similar position) to provide defined support.
You're thinking mostly home. Think full-scale enterprise, like I have to. It takes very little to saturate the links, especially when you factor in how much of the operations are now handled over the network. It's not just a few e-mails; Outlook can consume significant bandwidth (as can any client that keeps at least a copy client-side), and many companies require all data to be kept on network shares. Throw in roaming profiles and group policy-based software installations (even using BITS), and you can eat up wireless bandwidth very quickly.
The ability to match wire speeds for numerous users is going to be a huge benefit to companies that want to deploy wireless for something other than convenience in the conference rooms. Even when using a proper channel layout, even using 802.11a, you still have bandwidth contention within a channel on a single AP, and it mars the experience for the general user. Splitting higher bandwidth will assist in alleviating these issues.
http://space.newscientist.com/article/dn11239-rock et-explosion-creates-dangerous-space-junk.html
"And because the atmosphere is less dense at higher altitudes, the debris is likely to stay in space a long time because it will not be slowed down by friction with the atmosphere, which causes it to lose energy and burn up more quickly. Debris created during the Chinese test is thought to have reached lower altitudes - about 4000 km - but is expected to stay in space for hundreds of thousands of years."
The line is unsourced, but IME, New Scientist is good enough with the facts to be usable.
The problem with that is that it's unrealistic. Debris from the Chinese test is expected to remain in orbit for thousands of years. Pop enough satellites in a major war, and space may truly become unusable for decades or centuries. I suspect that if it came down to it, we'd soft-kill enemy satellites. The ABL is going to be ready for use in a couple of years, and it might be suitable for taking out an enemy satellite without shattering it.
We know the range of space where the asteroid might be. Matching that with where we know the Earth will be allows us the ability to figure out the range of locations where it might hit. You are correct, though, that the information is recalled from something that I read elsewhere.
Apophis has to thread a comparatively very tiny needle -- the area through which it must fly is about 400m across, IIRC. The chances that it will do this are slim, but because our observations and math don't provide the precision required in this multi-body gravitational system, we have to continue waiting to see where it will go.
All modern cards get binary blobs of proprietary firmware that is loaded by the driver. It's an FCC requirement of all software radios that is intended to limit the use of the radios outside of the intended use. Older wireless NICs used hardware radios, and so had no such requirements. Atheros has been a software radio for some time, and has worked well with the MADWifi project to provide the HAL required for the drivers.
This was going to be a major problem with the attempt to block kernel tainting in 2008, because legally, there was no way around having wireless drivers taint the kernel due to their use of the proprietary HAL.
I believe you refer to Apophis, the asteroid that will pass within about 35,000km of Earth in 2029. It will make another pass by the Earth in 2036, and has a 1:50,000 chance of striking somewhere between the Kamchatka Peninsula and Venzuela. Apophis was named after the Greek spelling of the Egyptian god Apep the Destroyer.
The document you reference explicitly states that the CIA was financing the Afghan fighters, and that Arab fighters were financed from Arab sources. I'm not sure where in there it says that the CIA was supplying Arab fighters money even through middlemen, as that suggestion is denied by al Qaeda second-in-command Ayman al-Zawahiri, Algerian-born Arab organizer Abdullah Anas, Pakistan ISI Brigadier Mohammad Yousaf, and by several people from within the CIA who were hands-on with the efforts to support the mujahedeen.
This doesn't include fallout effects, of course, as that's a much more complex issue, and would produce more effects than the initial detonations. However, Chernobyl has shown us that the effects of fallout don't always match our worst expectations (realizing that Chernobyl didn't throw as much mass into the air as would a nuclear warhead's explosion), so I don't think that the worst fears of fallout would be realized. Humanity would even survive and probably be able to rebuild some of the cities after a wait of perhaps only a few years, maybe decades.
These are just a few of the issues in the IAEA report itself. Iran is certainly being more forthcoming than Saddam Hussein ever was, but they're not as accommodating as Libya became, which is what the West is generally after.
China only has a few hundred nuclear weapons, and only 25-50 ICBMs. By the time a war starts with China, it may be up by another two dozen or so through SLBMs, but China's nuclear arsenal is a pittance compared to that of the US.