You still haven't listed a single source. I have provided a direct source.
Citations please. Especially before you start claiming others are ignorant when they provide citations, while you provide nothing but bitching and insults.
Yes, and that progress took them to where they are today - being slightly better than modern artillery. Before this progress, they were significantly worse.
Remind yourself that modern metallurgy pushed artillery quite a bit, and for example victory in Iraq's first war was largely attributed to the fact that US artillery had about 10km more range than Iraq's older artillery. That is where most of the damage came from, not the much advertised air strikes with guided weapons.
I didn't say what you suggest I said. Your interpretation is strange to say the least.
"Gut" does not equal "bacteria". They do however exist in the gut, and are an integral part of the process which transfer nutrients from contains of the gut into bloodstream.
Yes, the rail guns they use are marginally more powerful than modern artillery, while requiring utterly impractical:
1. Energy source. 2. Capacitors. 3. Cooling. 4. Survive only a handful of shots even at those power levels before entire barrel assembly must be replaced due to massive forces it has to handle deforming and destroying it.
Railgun with capabilities suggested is not present anywhere except the article I linked. The forces required for the railgun you suggest are far greater than what these massively impractical, largely dysfunctional test models that are already sitting on the bleeding edge of what we can do in terms of materials we can make.
IIRC pre-birth vagina's PH changes to allow bacterial migration from anal opening. As baby is born, it literally licks up the vaginal walls. In caesarean section birth doctors now take vaginal swabs and put them in baby's mouth to produce the same result. Follow-up comes through child having an instinct to put things in their mouths and mother's milk.
Remind yourself that women commonly suffer urinary tract infections for that same reason - something that men almost never suffer from in comparison.
That is not what is implied here. To get fat from energy, you need said energy to be absorbed form your gut into your bloodstream.
In this case, it appears that certain kind of gut microbiome may consume this energy without transferring it to the bloodstream. In other words, the suggestion that "what you eat ends up in you the same way it does in that other person" is factually incorrect - we already know that microbiome is individual and significantly impacts your ability to absorb nutrients.
The question here is how much of a difference it is.
You can't extrapolate complex issues like this. This is what happened with "let's have a medicine to change certain cholesterol levels" that cost enormous amount of money in trials and crashed and burned because it didn't do what extrapolation suggested it should do.
I'l like to see the quote on that from ballistics expert. How are you planning to have muzzle velocity high enough to get that kind of range on a ballistic weapon that has no motor and have the weapon survive the firing? And if you do manage to get it that high, how will you stabilize the weapon to have any kind of meaningful accuracy at that range?
That wasn't a "ship battle with big guns" but an aerial and land to sea engagement. The only ship that reached gun range was already crippled and could do nothing but serve as target practice.
You show your ignorance of reality again. Greece's problems weren't originally rooted in their debt. Their debt was a symptom of the far larger problem - their underlying social and economic structure.
In Iceland on the other hand, underlying structure was fine. The problem was that they allowed their banking sector to become oversized in relation to their actual economy due to its foreign investments.
These are two very different problems. Attempting to draw parallels between them betrays complete lack of understanding of underlying issues on your part.
As I said, you have a problem with reality. I'm even further convinced after your Iceland statement.
Iceland is in a dire situation as we speak. They have huge foreign debts to the worst of the worst - vulture hedge funds. The only reason their economy currently looks decent is because they forbade taking any money out of the economy without permission from their central bank. As a result, their economy looks stable because all the money they owe to foreign entities is forcibly retained within their economy.
Of course, that also means no meaningful foreign investments in their country, no purchasing power for their people due to inability to pay to any foreign entity without special permissions and so on. They are pretty much in the same position as Argentina. Any property of the government outside Iceland is forfeited, no government owned property including ships or airplanes can ever exit the country without being impounded to pay for debts and so on.
The only thing they avoided is the immediate effect of those debts. Just like Argentina did when it defaulted. Only that didn't really save it from those debts - they're still hanging over it to this day.
1. Actually the current claim is that FPGA is mostly for DRM, as it's basically a DRM wrapper around activesync, which is what G-sync appears to be. According to the guy behind this discovery at least. 2. Factually incorrect. G-sync is in fact inferior to Adaptivesync in refresh rate range in the current implementation. G-sync range is 30-144Hz, where Adaptivesync can handle (depending on the scaler) 36-240Hz, 21-144Hz, 17-120Hz and 9-60Hz. Source: http://www.geforce.com/hardwar... http://www.anandtech.com/show/... 3. In general, when someone uses a word "experience" to describe something as simple as syncing refresh rate, you know you're about to read some marketing bullshit. You certainly delivered, by arguing that alpha leaked driver delivering worse results than finished product is evidence of superiority of finished product. 5. Correct. However this is not about the driver, but what finding the fact that G-sync "mobile" is actually Activesync in a wrapper means for previous statements of Nvidia on the topic. Specifically that it means that a lot of those statements have been lies. And then there's the issue of the claim that G-sync is actually activesync in a DRM wrapper, presented by the original source that got its hands on the driver.
1. Nvidia claims that it needs the expensive FPGA chip to make variable refresh rate on current range of monitors. Calls it G-sync, tech adds significant costs and nvidia takes additinal licensing fee from monitors that include the said FPGA board. 2. AMD finds the adaptivesync spec in current VESA spec for embedded displayport used in laptops. Gets VESA to add it to upcoming displayport 1.2a spec for desktop. This does mostly the same thing without needed FPGA board or additional costly licencing fee. Monitors with adaptivesync and same specs end up about 100USD cheaper than monitors with G-sync and same specs. 3. Nvidia openly states that it cannot make G-sync cards compatible with adaptivesync any time soon and that it will continue supporting G-sync. Many pundits wonder how long Nvidia could keep attempting this kind of vendor lock-in on monitors before ceding its position due to rather extreme price differential between G-sync and adaptivesync monitors. 4. Laptops use eDP (embedded displayport) to connect monitor to GPU card which already has adaptivesync in the spec. 5, Alpha driver for nvidia mobile GPU sufraces which is made to work with adaptivesync over eDP, which driver itself calls "G-sync".
Conclusion - Nvidia lied about its adaptation of adaptivesync and it now appears extremely likely that nvidia will be using adaptivesync in its future products and just call it "G-sync mobile" or something similar.
That is the exact opposite of how humanity got where it is today. Not surrendering to whims of nature and instead engineering and manufacturing things we needed, ranging from animal domestication and farming to modern engineering.
If we followed your advice, we wouldn't even know how to start the fire yet.
Running ghostery in tandem with adblock using easylist (+ any local lists of your preferred language/region) will typically block any and all pests of this kind.
Except that we can't know it yet, because DX12 specs are not yet finalized. It's still under development.
Please note that "features" and "specs" are two very distinctly different things. Former says what API can do while latter says what graphics card must actually do to produce working features.
Only if you have google history of extremely pro-SJW searching, in which case it delivers you your circlejerk, just like if you only search for climate change denialist articles, it will deliver you only those.
Search through a proxy and results will be telling.
Ah yes. The "Mantle is AMAZING, DX12 is AMAZING, huge increases incoming because you can code to the metal with no driver overhead and otherwise more efficient CPU usage" argument.
Reality rained on it already. Only cases where gains are present are where CPU is extremely weak while GPU is extremely powerful. Gains are minimal if you're running even a half decent i5 and nonexistent if you're running i7. You're late with the hype.
That is why all the tech demos so far were done on ridiculously underpowered CPUs and top end GPUs. It does use CPU more efficiently, but almost all modern games massively undersubscribe the CPU, meaning no gains for using Mantle. This is what we already see in tests: http://www.pcper.com/reviews/G...
Then I suppose we have nothing to talk about. Anyone who thinks that quitting the Union itself would be good for his country has a serious problem with reality.
Reality: even countries outside the Union, like Norway and Switzerland are effectively forced to adopt EU regulations, rules and directives. Not because they are members of the Union - they are not, and they don't get a say on those regulations at all. But because they know that they will have a financial crash of epic proportion if they were to try to quit the EEA which requires member states to adopt most of the EU regulations and directives.
Suggesting that quitting EU is going to help your country is effectively suggesting that leaving the table where decisions are made, but having to still adopt all the rules that were decided at that table (just without your input now) is a good thing for a country. It requires a massive disconnect with reality to argue such a thing.
This is actually the one argument that I keep pushing on more extreme nvidia fans I run into (I run nvidia card in my machine so I end up talking to quite a few when discussing things like specific optimizations, features and so on). We cannot have nvidia monopoly. Prices would skyrocket. No matter how much you are mentally invested in the green camp, right now you should not avoid criticizing nvidia for current problems. We need the competition, and we need to keep nvidia's marketing machine truthful.
Slashdot Mirror
Question: What do we call the material form that is absorbable energy for our metabolism in the food?
Relevant: http://lmgtfy.com/?q=synonym
You still haven't listed a single source. I have provided a direct source.
Citations please. Especially before you start claiming others are ignorant when they provide citations, while you provide nothing but bitching and insults.
Yes, and that progress took them to where they are today - being slightly better than modern artillery. Before this progress, they were significantly worse.
Remind yourself that modern metallurgy pushed artillery quite a bit, and for example victory in Iraq's first war was largely attributed to the fact that US artillery had about 10km more range than Iraq's older artillery. That is where most of the damage came from, not the much advertised air strikes with guided weapons.
Because you cause multi-billion and lethal fuck ups by doing so.
I didn't say what you suggest I said. Your interpretation is strange to say the least.
"Gut" does not equal "bacteria". They do however exist in the gut, and are an integral part of the process which transfer nutrients from contains of the gut into bloodstream.
Yes, the rail guns they use are marginally more powerful than modern artillery, while requiring utterly impractical:
1. Energy source.
2. Capacitors.
3. Cooling.
4. Survive only a handful of shots even at those power levels before entire barrel assembly must be replaced due to massive forces it has to handle deforming and destroying it.
Railgun with capabilities suggested is not present anywhere except the article I linked. The forces required for the railgun you suggest are far greater than what these massively impractical, largely dysfunctional test models that are already sitting on the bleeding edge of what we can do in terms of materials we can make.
IIRC pre-birth vagina's PH changes to allow bacterial migration from anal opening. As baby is born, it literally licks up the vaginal walls. In caesarean section birth doctors now take vaginal swabs and put them in baby's mouth to produce the same result.
Follow-up comes through child having an instinct to put things in their mouths and mother's milk.
Remind yourself that women commonly suffer urinary tract infections for that same reason - something that men almost never suffer from in comparison.
That is not what is implied here. To get fat from energy, you need said energy to be absorbed form your gut into your bloodstream.
In this case, it appears that certain kind of gut microbiome may consume this energy without transferring it to the bloodstream. In other words, the suggestion that "what you eat ends up in you the same way it does in that other person" is factually incorrect - we already know that microbiome is individual and significantly impacts your ability to absorb nutrients.
The question here is how much of a difference it is.
You can't extrapolate complex issues like this. This is what happened with "let's have a medicine to change certain cholesterol levels" that cost enormous amount of money in trials and crashed and burned because it didn't do what extrapolation suggested it should do.
I'l like to see the quote on that from ballistics expert. How are you planning to have muzzle velocity high enough to get that kind of range on a ballistic weapon that has no motor and have the weapon survive the firing? And if you do manage to get it that high, how will you stabilize the weapon to have any kind of meaningful accuracy at that range?
The only source for this claim that I can find is here:
http://nationalinterest.org/co...
And it can be summarized as "wishful thinking".
That wasn't a "ship battle with big guns" but an aerial and land to sea engagement. The only ship that reached gun range was already crippled and could do nothing but serve as target practice.
You show your ignorance of reality again. Greece's problems weren't originally rooted in their debt. Their debt was a symptom of the far larger problem - their underlying social and economic structure.
In Iceland on the other hand, underlying structure was fine. The problem was that they allowed their banking sector to become oversized in relation to their actual economy due to its foreign investments.
These are two very different problems. Attempting to draw parallels between them betrays complete lack of understanding of underlying issues on your part.
As I said, you have a problem with reality. I'm even further convinced after your Iceland statement.
Iceland is in a dire situation as we speak. They have huge foreign debts to the worst of the worst - vulture hedge funds. The only reason their economy currently looks decent is because they forbade taking any money out of the economy without permission from their central bank. As a result, their economy looks stable because all the money they owe to foreign entities is forcibly retained within their economy.
Of course, that also means no meaningful foreign investments in their country, no purchasing power for their people due to inability to pay to any foreign entity without special permissions and so on. They are pretty much in the same position as Argentina. Any property of the government outside Iceland is forfeited, no government owned property including ships or airplanes can ever exit the country without being impounded to pay for debts and so on.
The only thing they avoided is the immediate effect of those debts. Just like Argentina did when it defaulted. Only that didn't really save it from those debts - they're still hanging over it to this day.
1. Actually the current claim is that FPGA is mostly for DRM, as it's basically a DRM wrapper around activesync, which is what G-sync appears to be. According to the guy behind this discovery at least.
2. Factually incorrect. G-sync is in fact inferior to Adaptivesync in refresh rate range in the current implementation. G-sync range is 30-144Hz, where Adaptivesync can handle (depending on the scaler) 36-240Hz, 21-144Hz, 17-120Hz and 9-60Hz.
Source: http://www.geforce.com/hardwar...
http://www.anandtech.com/show/...
3. In general, when someone uses a word "experience" to describe something as simple as syncing refresh rate, you know you're about to read some marketing bullshit. You certainly delivered, by arguing that alpha leaked driver delivering worse results than finished product is evidence of superiority of finished product.
5. Correct. However this is not about the driver, but what finding the fact that G-sync "mobile" is actually Activesync in a wrapper means for previous statements of Nvidia on the topic. Specifically that it means that a lot of those statements have been lies.
And then there's the issue of the claim that G-sync is actually activesync in a DRM wrapper, presented by the original source that got its hands on the driver.
The original story goes like this:
1. Nvidia claims that it needs the expensive FPGA chip to make variable refresh rate on current range of monitors. Calls it G-sync, tech adds significant costs and nvidia takes additinal licensing fee from monitors that include the said FPGA board.
2. AMD finds the adaptivesync spec in current VESA spec for embedded displayport used in laptops. Gets VESA to add it to upcoming displayport 1.2a spec for desktop. This does mostly the same thing without needed FPGA board or additional costly licencing fee. Monitors with adaptivesync and same specs end up about 100USD cheaper than monitors with G-sync and same specs.
3. Nvidia openly states that it cannot make G-sync cards compatible with adaptivesync any time soon and that it will continue supporting G-sync. Many pundits wonder how long Nvidia could keep attempting this kind of vendor lock-in on monitors before ceding its position due to rather extreme price differential between G-sync and adaptivesync monitors.
4. Laptops use eDP (embedded displayport) to connect monitor to GPU card which already has adaptivesync in the spec.
5, Alpha driver for nvidia mobile GPU sufraces which is made to work with adaptivesync over eDP, which driver itself calls "G-sync".
Conclusion - Nvidia lied about its adaptation of adaptivesync and it now appears extremely likely that nvidia will be using adaptivesync in its future products and just call it "G-sync mobile" or something similar.
That is the exact opposite of how humanity got where it is today. Not surrendering to whims of nature and instead engineering and manufacturing things we needed, ranging from animal domestication and farming to modern engineering.
If we followed your advice, we wouldn't even know how to start the fire yet.
Running ghostery in tandem with adblock using easylist (+ any local lists of your preferred language/region) will typically block any and all pests of this kind.
You listed a lot of reasons why someone would want to perform transaction at the police station.
You still haven't presented a single reason why police should investigate people who refuse to do transactions at police station.
Except that we can't know it yet, because DX12 specs are not yet finalized. It's still under development.
Please note that "features" and "specs" are two very distinctly different things. Former says what API can do while latter says what graphics card must actually do to produce working features.
Only if you have google history of extremely pro-SJW searching, in which case it delivers you your circlejerk, just like if you only search for climate change denialist articles, it will deliver you only those.
Search through a proxy and results will be telling.
Explain the logic why they should. You presented none.
That would work. Pouring lead into weapon's barrel is a very efficient way if disabling it.
Ah yes. The "Mantle is AMAZING, DX12 is AMAZING, huge increases incoming because you can code to the metal with no driver overhead and otherwise more efficient CPU usage" argument.
Reality rained on it already. Only cases where gains are present are where CPU is extremely weak while GPU is extremely powerful. Gains are minimal if you're running even a half decent i5 and nonexistent if you're running i7. You're late with the hype.
That is why all the tech demos so far were done on ridiculously underpowered CPUs and top end GPUs. It does use CPU more efficiently, but almost all modern games massively undersubscribe the CPU, meaning no gains for using Mantle. This is what we already see in tests:
http://www.pcper.com/reviews/G...
Then I suppose we have nothing to talk about. Anyone who thinks that quitting the Union itself would be good for his country has a serious problem with reality.
Reality: even countries outside the Union, like Norway and Switzerland are effectively forced to adopt EU regulations, rules and directives. Not because they are members of the Union - they are not, and they don't get a say on those regulations at all. But because they know that they will have a financial crash of epic proportion if they were to try to quit the EEA which requires member states to adopt most of the EU regulations and directives.
Suggesting that quitting EU is going to help your country is effectively suggesting that leaving the table where decisions are made, but having to still adopt all the rules that were decided at that table (just without your input now) is a good thing for a country. It requires a massive disconnect with reality to argue such a thing.
This is actually the one argument that I keep pushing on more extreme nvidia fans I run into (I run nvidia card in my machine so I end up talking to quite a few when discussing things like specific optimizations, features and so on). We cannot have nvidia monopoly. Prices would skyrocket. No matter how much you are mentally invested in the green camp, right now you should not avoid criticizing nvidia for current problems. We need the competition, and we need to keep nvidia's marketing machine truthful.
Otherwise everyone will lose.