I ascribe to this principle as well but there's another side to the equation: don't do the crime if you can't do the time. In other words, I am all in favor of people leaking classified information but I am also in favor of them being prosecuted for doing so. Similarly, while I find torture abhorrent, if someone takes it upon themselves to torture another and should the data extracted be valuable (even preventing something terrible from happening), then the torturer should still be prosecuted for the crime.
I think a DDW watercraft could be made to do this as well. Have two propellers: one in the air and the other in the water. Mechanically link the water propeller to the wind propeller. Assuming friction with the water isn't too great (flat bottom boat?) and the ratio between the water prop and the air prop is tuned, you should be able to make a DDW watercraft move faster than the wind.
I understand your points, however it was *Valve* who decided to sell these products at a different price. The market discovered a cheaper price and now they have locked out the deal finders. Valve should have *never* offered these products for such discounts.
You've explained Van der Waals force but not the Casimir Effect. In principle, Casimir Effect doesn't need conducting plates; it just turns out to work better experimentally. It's a pretty simple idea if you've ever worked with QM. The first word in QM is "quantum" meaning that forces are quantized.
Imagine the vacuum is seething with "virtual" particles instantaneously created and nullifying each other. Because these are "quantum" particles, they can only have certain energy states. Now, when you bring two plates together, the space between those plates *exclude* certain energy states. Why? Imagine dropping something into a rectangular pool of water. A lot of different waves will be generated, however the only waves which will be "stable" between those two walls are integer multiples of the distance between the walls. That is, the waves are the harmonic intervals of the wall distance.
Okay, back to Casimir. So, when you bring two plates together, the only "virtual" particles that will be admitted are those particles with wavelengths at harmonic intervals of the distance between the two plates. The closer you bring the plates together, the more particles that are excluded. Now, think of outside those plates (which is the rest of the Universe) where no exclusion exists. We will have created a "pressure" forcing the two plates together.
Actually, right in the beginning of the article is the counter-argument. If Mars and Pluto are warming due to increased solar radiation, how come we don't see warming on all the other planets too?
I'd be really surprised if the change in airflow would have a significant effect on the efficiency of an automobile. First, while it is true that you *could* have laminar airflow on the road, recall that traffic is moving in *both* directions meaning that airflow is already not laminar. Second, the laminar effect is really pretty "localized" meaning that you'd only see efficiency gains if you were traveling relatively close to car in front of you (or some sort of a distance-to-cross-sectional-area relationship). So, again I'd be surprised if there's any significant increase in the MPG in your car.
Right now, we're essentially throwing the energy away when we push all that air around to maintain speed. I think it's a pretty cool idea to attempt to regain some of that energy back.
IPPR is wrong yet again, and in a very predictable way. The left in the UK is always conducting debates on the basis of false dichotomies. In this case the alleged dichotomy is between private rights and public resources.
New Rule
When debating a specific point (either pro or con), one is disallowed from using the words "liberal" or "conservative" or other politically charged, non-salient phrases.
Technically speaking, it isn't the RIAA who gets royalties for a performance. The RIAA controls "original recordings" and not compositions (i.e. the song itself). Instead, you get license from ASCAP, BMI, SESAC in order to publically perform a song.
Re:Transparrrrrent Aluminium, out There Somewhere
on
Element 118 Created
·
· Score: 1
But, it does exist; it's called Aluminum Oxide. That is, sapphire/ruby with no impurities. The problem to be solved is one of cheap manufacture and not creation.
They are just hysterical parrots, mouthing what their overlords at the DNC have taught them. "Squawk! Bush evil! Squawk! Democrats Good! Squawk!"
Heh... That's pretty funny. Here's a question you should ask yourself though. Would you accept the same level of inscrutability with regard to controls on wiretapping from the Executive branch if Hillary were President?
Lock the "Christo-fascists" and the "Islamo-fascists" in a room. The last one standing gets to be either Raptured or receives 70 virgins, respectively. Note that we could have a round two where the winner gets to be locked in a room with the "Ziono-fascists".
I have always boggled at how geeks must always structure and type things accurately to get computers to understand them, but then completely fail to express themselves as accurately in any other form of communication.
The difference is that progammers depend on the compiler/interpreter to enforce syntax and grammar correctness. Oh, wait...
AI reseach is still pretty much stuck in the 80s. Nothing earth shattering has occurred since then, just small improvement here and there.
This is like saying: nothing earth shattering has occurred since the invention of the lightbulb just small improvements. Our definition of what constitutes AI changes as we solve AI problems. Yes, we don't have human level intelligences, but we do have decent voice recognition and autonomous navigation.
There is no technology that is going to protect against all threats. THEL removes certain opportunities, forcing would-be terrorists to deal with a smaller attack profile. Just because the THEL concept doesn't work on all threats doesn't mean that it's an invalid concept.
Consider network security. We use firewalls to deal with certain connectivity threats. We use IDS/IPS to deal with certain threats that go through connectivity that must remain open. We use antivirus to deal with certain e-mail and file-based threats. We use logs to look for deviations from accepted activity within systems. None of those on its own will deal with all of those threats on its own.
This analogy works if and only if the scale of cost and reliability of THEL is similar to that of a firewall. I don't think that deployment/maintenance costs of a firewall vs. intrusions have the same relative scaling of THEL vs. a missile attack. Moreover, if you close a port with a firewall, then it is essentially impossible (where impossible = probability down to some tiny epsilon value) to access whereas THEL will never have that level of reliability for missile defense. Of course, if your goal is to provide jobs and/or larger stock portfolios for the defense industry, then projects like THEL are supremely successful.
Please use facts when making an argument. This is just a dumb statement that shows you have no good points to argue.
Yes, but we all know that facts are the tools of the liberal elite. It's better to use truthyness when making an argument. It would terrible to be castigated as one of those liberals. BTW, did you know Ted Kennedy eats fresh, raw puppies for breakfast?
I'm not in the camp who thinks unions are inherently bad nor do I think they're inherently good. They are but one solution. I offer another solution that I hope could be instituted into the workplace: management should be held responsible to the outcome of their decisions, good and bad. My experience has been that management makes decisions that have no traceability back to them. Specifically, they are not held responsible for the risks they take. If something goes wrong, the blame rolls downhill OR they just transfer to a different part of the company. In other words, there is no personal responsibility. And, even more insidiously, it is in other manager's best interest to keep it that way so that they aren't held responsible either. Just my two cents...
Did you forget that it requires an act of Congress to declare war, or do you just prefer to let the legislative branch delude you so they can get re-elected?
Ignoring for the moment that there was no act of Congress to declare war but rather Congress gave Dubya permission to do whatever was "necessary", I do blame Congress. The President gets half and Congress gets the other half. Each member of Congress gets about 0.5*(blame)/(aye-votes) ~= (blame)/1000. The President, of course, gets 0.5*(blame). Personally, I tend to focus on the "low-hanging fruit" for blame game.
Slashdot Mirror
I think you mean: ontology masquerading as an insight. That said, a nice insight on insight.
I ascribe to this principle as well but there's another side to the equation: don't do the crime if you can't do the time. In other words, I am all in favor of people leaking classified information but I am also in favor of them being prosecuted for doing so. Similarly, while I find torture abhorrent, if someone takes it upon themselves to torture another and should the data extracted be valuable (even preventing something terrible from happening), then the torturer should still be prosecuted for the crime.
I think a DDW watercraft could be made to do this as well. Have two propellers: one in the air and the other in the water. Mechanically link the water propeller to the wind propeller. Assuming friction with the water isn't too great (flat bottom boat?) and the ratio between the water prop and the air prop is tuned, you should be able to make a DDW watercraft move faster than the wind.
Out of curiosity, is there an ISO country code for low Earth orbit?
"Anyone can hack!"
I understand your points, however it was *Valve* who decided to sell these products at a different price. The market discovered a cheaper price and now they have locked out the deal finders. Valve should have *never* offered these products for such discounts.
It's people that burn people.
You've explained Van der Waals force but not the Casimir Effect. In principle, Casimir Effect doesn't need conducting plates; it just turns out to work better experimentally. It's a pretty simple idea if you've ever worked with QM. The first word in QM is "quantum" meaning that forces are quantized.
Imagine the vacuum is seething with "virtual" particles instantaneously created and nullifying each other. Because these are "quantum" particles, they can only have certain energy states. Now, when you bring two plates together, the space between those plates *exclude* certain energy states. Why? Imagine dropping something into a rectangular pool of water. A lot of different waves will be generated, however the only waves which will be "stable" between those two walls are integer multiples of the distance between the walls. That is, the waves are the harmonic intervals of the wall distance.
Okay, back to Casimir. So, when you bring two plates together, the only "virtual" particles that will be admitted are those particles with wavelengths at harmonic intervals of the distance between the two plates. The closer you bring the plates together, the more particles that are excluded. Now, think of outside those plates (which is the rest of the Universe) where no exclusion exists. We will have created a "pressure" forcing the two plates together.
Actually, right in the beginning of the article is the counter-argument. If Mars and Pluto are warming due to increased solar radiation, how come we don't see warming on all the other planets too?
I'd be really surprised if the change in airflow would have a significant effect on the efficiency of an automobile. First, while it is true that you *could* have laminar airflow on the road, recall that traffic is moving in *both* directions meaning that airflow is already not laminar. Second, the laminar effect is really pretty "localized" meaning that you'd only see efficiency gains if you were traveling relatively close to car in front of you (or some sort of a distance-to-cross-sectional-area relationship). So, again I'd be surprised if there's any significant increase in the MPG in your car.
Right now, we're essentially throwing the energy away when we push all that air around to maintain speed. I think it's a pretty cool idea to attempt to regain some of that energy back.
Court: "Doesn't it say 'Die Bold, Die?'"
Bob: "No, that's German for 'The Bold, The.'"
Whisper: "No one who speaks German could be an evil man."
If government-run health care is good enough for our troops, why is it not good enough for our civilians?
When debating a specific point (either pro or con), one is disallowed from using the words "liberal" or "conservative" or other politically charged, non-salient phrases.
Q: What's the difference between communism and a monopoly?
A: You don't get to vote for the monopoly.
Technically speaking, it isn't the RIAA who gets royalties for a performance. The RIAA controls "original recordings" and not compositions (i.e. the song itself). Instead, you get license from ASCAP, BMI, SESAC in order to publically perform a song.
But, it does exist; it's called Aluminum Oxide. That is, sapphire/ruby with no impurities. The problem to be solved is one of cheap manufacture and not creation.
It may be that either (a) your cable modem does not support DOCSIS 1.1 or (b) Comcast's head-end isn't provisioned for QOS services.
Lock the "Christo-fascists" and the "Islamo-fascists" in a room. The last one standing gets to be either Raptured or receives 70 virgins, respectively. Note that we could have a round two where the winner gets to be locked in a room with the "Ziono-fascists".
Please use facts when making an argument. This is just a dumb statement that shows you have no good points to argue.
Yes, but we all know that facts are the tools of the liberal elite. It's better to use truthyness when making an argument. It would terrible to be castigated as one of those liberals. BTW, did you know Ted Kennedy eats fresh, raw puppies for breakfast?
I'm not in the camp who thinks unions are inherently bad nor do I think they're inherently good. They are but one solution. I offer another solution that I hope could be instituted into the workplace: management should be held responsible to the outcome of their decisions, good and bad. My experience has been that management makes decisions that have no traceability back to them. Specifically, they are not held responsible for the risks they take. If something goes wrong, the blame rolls downhill OR they just transfer to a different part of the company. In other words, there is no personal responsibility. And, even more insidiously, it is in other manager's best interest to keep it that way so that they aren't held responsible either. Just my two cents...