You'll never improve the position of the major party most closely aligned to your views if you vote for one you dislike just because the other one is worse. You have to be willing to lose in the short term to win in the long term. If the major party closest to your preference sees they can pick up a bunch more votes by tilting slightly your way, then the next election might have someone more palatable.
In order to be qualified as a SolarCity supplier, manufacturers need to have effective Quality Assurance programs and refined manufacturing processes in place, and steady product and manufacturing quality must be demonstrated. Rigorous tests need to be passed on an ongoing basis, performed by a qualified 3rd party lab. Furthermore, we require that factory controls and in-line testing are in place to ensure quality is sustained over time and deviations are rapidly detected, so the deployment of faulty products in the field is prevented.
Unless the loan rates are so low that you can more profitably use that money for something else. With good credit you should be getting 2% loan offers - even if you can afford to pay it all at once, you might prefer to invest in something with 3-5% return instead. Or use it for other profit-making endeavors.
No, Hawking radiation is related to the area of the event horizon (and therefore the mass), and is only relevant for very small black holes, as for anything above ~0.4 lunar masses (1.5e-8 solar mass) it will absorb more energy from cosmic microwave background than it emits in Hawking radiation.
From the papers, the first detection was a merger which radiated three times the mass-energy of the sun in gravitational waves. The second was 'only' ~1 M*.
Yep, that's the point. This is what those preferring to vote for the 'lesser of two evils', instead of the 'good, but unelectable' always miss: you can't push the party closest to your preferences closer to your preferences by voting for someone that's moving the party away from your preferences, even if the opposition is worse. You must be willing to lose in the short term to gain in the long term, or you'll just keep repeatedly losing in the short term while complaining that your vote doesn't matter.
Exactly. This is what those preferring to vote for the 'lesser of two evils', instead of the 'good, but unelectable' always miss: you can't push the party closest to your preferences closer to your preferences by voting for someone that's moving the party away from your preferences, even if the opposition is worse. You must be willing to lose in the short term to gain in the long term, or you'll just keep repeatedly losing in the short term while complaining that your vote doesn't matter. (not referring to the parent poster specifically)
The Democrats, for example, have no reason to move further left if all Sanders supporters vote for Clinton - if that happens, then as they see it, Clinton satisfied everyone fine! Maybe the next candidate can be even further right to pick up some Republicans! Whereas if they lose the election because of Sanders, the next candidate will have to move further left to capture those people they lost the previous election. Note that my example is a bit simplified onto a single-axis system for the sake of simplicity; at least some Sanders supporters would prefer Trump to Clinton.
Actually, many NEOs are 'closer' in terms of dV than the moon. LEO to LLO is ~8km/s dV, many LEOs are much less than that - the table above is for round trip dV, by default showing those that are less than 6km/s dV.
But if it's a three person election - then Trump may very well win, regardless who the third person is. Lets say Bernie Sanders decides to run as an independent. While he lost on maths, the man got a LOT of votes, and even in the states where lost his margins were narrow. One could easily see him taking several states that would otherwise have gone to Hillary, and just one or two states could make all the difference. I would prefer Bernie over Hillary but right now I hope he drops out after the convention - because if he runs then Trump wins.
But would it be better to suffer four years under Trump, and then get a Democratic candidate that was closer to Sanders than Clinton? This is what those preferring to vote for the 'lesser of two evils', instead of the 'good, but unelectable' always miss: you can't push the party closest to your preferences closer to your preferences by voting for someone that's moving the party away from your preferences, even if the opposition is worse. You must be willing to lose in the short term to gain in the long term, or you'll just keep repeatedly losing in the short term while complaining that your vote doesn't matter. (not referring to the parent poster specifically)
The Democrats, for example, have no reason to move further left if all Sanders supporters vote for Clinton - if that happens, then as they see it, Clinton satisfied everyone fine! Maybe the next candidate can be even further right to pick up some Republicans! Whereas if they lose the election because of Sanders, the next candidate will have to move further left to capture those people they lost the previous election.
That's a bit simplified onto a single-axis system for the sake of example; at least some Sanders supporters would prefer Trump to Clinton. A two-axis system works better, but is less familiar to people.
Signal is OSS, uses client-side end-to-end encryption, and features both messaging and video (formerly 'TextSecure' + 'RedPhone'). If the recipient doesn't have Signal, messaging goes out as a regular SMS/MMS (with 'unsecure' warning).
The only information stored on the Signal servers, iirc, are hashes of the phone numbers and corresponding IPs to allow the clients to find eachother.
Apparently they're responsible for the encryption of Google's Allo, too, as well as WhatsApp.
You may be interested in Translation Party, which iteratively does English to Japanese to English translation (via Bing translate APIs) until an equilibrium is reached - i.e. the retranslated text no longer changes.
Text within an iteration translation party interested in English to reach the English re-translation Japan translation equilibrium does not change.
Close to that, a 1964 Twilight Zone episode involves a manned probe on a 40-year (relativistic ship-time) scouting mission - when he returns with his results, he finds out that the mission was long ago accomplished by technology developed after his departure.
When I was 10 years old, Fusion was just 20 years away.
Now that I'm 40, Fusion is 30 years away.
That's because already-low funding dropped even more. See this chart formerly featured on/. . "Fusion in 20 years" was never going to happen at actually funded levels, but might have with several proposed funding plans.
FlatCam is an instance of a coded aperture imaging system; however, unlike the vast majority of related work, we place the coded mask extremely close to the image sensor that can enable a thin system.
Slashdot Mirror
You'll never improve the position of the major party most closely aligned to your views if you vote for one you dislike just because the other one is worse. You have to be willing to lose in the short term to win in the long term. If the major party closest to your preference sees they can pick up a bunch more votes by tilting slightly your way, then the next election might have someone more palatable.
In order to be qualified as a SolarCity supplier, manufacturers need to have effective Quality Assurance programs and refined manufacturing processes in place, and steady product and manufacturing quality must be demonstrated. Rigorous tests need to be passed on an ongoing basis, performed by a qualified 3rd party lab. Furthermore, we require that factory controls and in-line testing are in place to ensure quality is sustained over time and deviations are rapidly detected, so the deployment of faulty products in the field is prevented.
Unless the loan rates are so low that you can more profitably use that money for something else. With good credit you should be getting 2% loan offers - even if you can afford to pay it all at once, you might prefer to invest in something with 3-5% return instead. Or use it for other profit-making endeavors.
-12 + 0.005 + 10.3 ~= -1.7 Gya, 1.7e9 lightyear ~= 521Mpc, which fits within the 410 +160 -180 Mpc estimated distance.
No, Hawking radiation is related to the area of the event horizon (and therefore the mass), and is only relevant for very small black holes, as for anything above ~0.4 lunar masses (1.5e-8 solar mass) it will absorb more energy from cosmic microwave background than it emits in Hawking radiation.
From the papers, the first detection was a merger which radiated three times the mass-energy of the sun in gravitational waves. The second was 'only' ~1 M*.
Yep, that's the point. This is what those preferring to vote for the 'lesser of two evils', instead of the 'good, but unelectable' always miss: you can't push the party closest to your preferences closer to your preferences by voting for someone that's moving the party away from your preferences, even if the opposition is worse. You must be willing to lose in the short term to gain in the long term, or you'll just keep repeatedly losing in the short term while complaining that your vote doesn't matter.
I believe you can opt out of the program at purchase.
Exactly. This is what those preferring to vote for the 'lesser of two evils', instead of the 'good, but unelectable' always miss: you can't push the party closest to your preferences closer to your preferences by voting for someone that's moving the party away from your preferences, even if the opposition is worse. You must be willing to lose in the short term to gain in the long term, or you'll just keep repeatedly losing in the short term while complaining that your vote doesn't matter. (not referring to the parent poster specifically)
The Democrats, for example, have no reason to move further left if all Sanders supporters vote for Clinton - if that happens, then as they see it, Clinton satisfied everyone fine! Maybe the next candidate can be even further right to pick up some Republicans! Whereas if they lose the election because of Sanders, the next candidate will have to move further left to capture those people they lost the previous election. Note that my example is a bit simplified onto a single-axis system for the sake of simplicity; at least some Sanders supporters would prefer Trump to Clinton.
Actually, many NEOs are 'closer' in terms of dV than the moon. LEO to LLO is ~8km/s dV, many LEOs are much less than that - the table above is for round trip dV, by default showing those that are less than 6km/s dV.
But if it's a three person election - then Trump may very well win, regardless who the third person is. Lets say Bernie Sanders decides to run as an independent. While he lost on maths, the man got a LOT of votes, and even in the states where lost his margins were narrow. One could easily see him taking several states that would otherwise have gone to Hillary, and just one or two states could make all the difference. I would prefer Bernie over Hillary but right now I hope he drops out after the convention - because if he runs then Trump wins.
But would it be better to suffer four years under Trump, and then get a Democratic candidate that was closer to Sanders than Clinton? This is what those preferring to vote for the 'lesser of two evils', instead of the 'good, but unelectable' always miss: you can't push the party closest to your preferences closer to your preferences by voting for someone that's moving the party away from your preferences, even if the opposition is worse. You must be willing to lose in the short term to gain in the long term, or you'll just keep repeatedly losing in the short term while complaining that your vote doesn't matter. (not referring to the parent poster specifically)
The Democrats, for example, have no reason to move further left if all Sanders supporters vote for Clinton - if that happens, then as they see it, Clinton satisfied everyone fine! Maybe the next candidate can be even further right to pick up some Republicans! Whereas if they lose the election because of Sanders, the next candidate will have to move further left to capture those people they lost the previous election.
That's a bit simplified onto a single-axis system for the sake of example; at least some Sanders supporters would prefer Trump to Clinton. A two-axis system works better, but is less familiar to people.
The newer Samsung phones self-disable when rooted, unfortunately. I can't find a good replacement for my Note2 that has wireless charging.
Apparently both the new Allo and WhatsApp use Signal's protocol for end-to-end encryption.
Signal is OSS, uses client-side end-to-end encryption, and features both messaging and video (formerly 'TextSecure' + 'RedPhone'). If the recipient doesn't have Signal, messaging goes out as a regular SMS/MMS (with 'unsecure' warning).
The only information stored on the Signal servers, iirc, are hashes of the phone numbers and corresponding IPs to allow the clients to find eachother.
Apparently they're responsible for the encryption of Google's Allo, too, as well as WhatsApp.
Text within an iteration translation party interested in English to reach the English re-translation Japan translation equilibrium does not change.
Because I don't have to sit down in an elevator where random people committed unknowable unsanitary acts.
Yep, it sounds like they just converted 24fps or 30fps to frames per minute and claim it analyzes every frame.
I prefer WinRAR.
Close to that, a 1964 Twilight Zone episode involves a manned probe on a 40-year (relativistic ship-time) scouting mission - when he returns with his results, he finds out that the mission was long ago accomplished by technology developed after his departure.
Not an Ansible?
I have a VM I specifically use when I need to buy iTunes gift certificates. Install, buy, revert to snapshot.
When I was 10 years old, Fusion was just 20 years away.
Now that I'm 40, Fusion is 30 years away.
That's because already-low funding dropped even more. See this chart formerly featured on /. . "Fusion in 20 years" was never going to happen at actually funded levels, but might have with several proposed funding plans.
Indeed, we spend almost nothing on it and expect it to achieve great things anyways.
Per the original paper, that's what they use to train the NN and as a goodness metric.
FlatCam is an instance of a coded aperture imaging system; however, unlike the vast majority of related work, we place the coded mask extremely close to the image sensor that can enable a thin system.