Last time I checked, T-Mobile was a german provider, headquartered in Bonn, Germany. T-Mobile US is (after the merger with MetroPCS) 74% owned by T-Mobile Germany.
Some countries have an internal carbon market, some trade zones (e.g. the E.U.) have them. That's fine, but the Paris Agreement does not demand having carbon markets.
The Paris Agreement was a self-commitment of all signing countries to limit the increase in global temperatures to 2 degrees Celsius until the year 2100. Not more, nothing less. If Climate Change was non existant, or a naturally occuring phenomenom, the U.S. could simply keep the agreement because either the global climate doesn't change at all, or the climate change is so slow (previous climate changes took ten thousands of years to happen), that there is no reason to fear anything within the next 100 years.
At no point in the agreement there was any mentioning of wealth or the redistribution of it.
But with a few companies having a quite complete picture about everything you are up online, it will be more and more difficult to develop something revolutionary (pardon: disruptive) without them noticing. And with their superior manpower they might be able to beat any small group of developers to market.
The problem is not the echo-ability as such, but the direction of the echo.
With a smooth surface, you have the elementary law of reflection: incoming angle equals outgoing angle. That means that only the sound wave that hits the glass plane at exactly 90 degrees will be reflected back into the direction it came from. Thus only the bats flying straight to the glass window will detect it with echo-location. Any bat flying in an arbitrary angle to the plane will not hear the echo, as it is directed away from the bat.
A brick wall has lots of different angles, and the probability is very high that at least some part of the brick wall will reflect the echo back to the source.
Basicly this is the same effect stealth technology uses to make objects invisible to radar: plane surfaces will not reflect anything back to the source except for the quite improbable case to be hit directly at a 90 degree angle.
If we look at the conditions of a fair election, we have certain criteria to be met. Elections should be fair, meaning that voting should be no undue burden to each of the voters. Elections should be free, meaning no one should be able to force you to vote a certain way. Elections should be equal, meaning, that each vote counts the same, votes are not tampered with, and no additional votes should be added (e.g. ballot stuffing or changing invalid votes into valid ones).
The problem with e-voting is that it can't warrant free and equal at the same time. If voting is free, no one should be able to know how you have voted, and you should not be able to keep any proof how you voted. Because if you could prove your vote, a "voting enforcer" could either pay you if you provide proof to have voted correctly, or punish you for not having the proof. For e-voting that means that there should be no electronic or physic trail from a vote back to you. On the other hand, there has to be proof that all valid votes have been counted, no vote has been tampered with, and no additional votes have been added to ensure the equality of votes. How do you keep track of immaterial entities? You can't sign them with the voter's key, otherwise they aren't free anymore. If you sign them with another key, how do you ensure that this key is not used to add votes? And how do you ensure that the votes are really counted the way they were cast? And how do you watch the count? One important argument why to use computers in the first place is to speed up the counting process. I disagree. Counting should never be faster than the watchers can count.
It takes a team of specialists to go through the code of the voting application itself to ensure it does only what it is supposed to do. And the Underhanded C Contest shows how easy it is to hide side effects within code. And this only looks at the application itself. It doesn't even look at the operating system or hardware tampering. Who does audit the millions of lines of code for the operating system and the billions of transistors on today's processors and RAM chips?
Having people watching the sealing of the ballot box and people watching the ballot boxes during the voting process until the seal is broken and the votes are counted by hand, and then the resealing of the boxes and the transport to the central voting office together with the counting tabs, and then watching how the final tab is counted does not require any specialist knowledge.
Yes, if fish have the same evolutionary speed than E. coli, we can expect fish to digest plastic correctly within 30,000 to 35,000 generations. It's just about to happen! Wait and see!
Some negative effects that scientists have discovered when fish consume plastic include reduced activity rates and weakened schooling behavior, as well as compromised liver function.
Thus your question is based on a false assumption.
I know what his algorithm does. And for n=1000, it will take more time than a billion universes put together. Thus he will get nothing -- at least not in this Universe.
You can claim your prize as soon as your algorithm put onto a standard computer came up with a solution to the "n queens on an n x n board" with n=1000.
I don't see any of the problems the study is investigating. I never used Radio to discover music. I don't have any playlists, I don't subscribe to any streaming service. I listen to radio for the news, and the radio stations I listen to are mainly having political and travel magazines, interviews, science and history features.
I don't know if such stations exists in the U.S. (besides NPR). At least I didn't find any of them when I was in the U.S. the last time.
And do you have a similar oversight over people who stay at home?
No. Because they stay at home, and you never met them. Thus while people tend to be idiots everywhere (even travelers), you incorrectly assume that the people staying at home are somewhat more smart. This is survivorship bias. You don't have any sufficient data to make conclusions about people staying at home.
And the difference between Holland and the Netherlands being...?
Yes, there are two provinties, Noord-Holland and Zuid-Holland, which together you could call "Holland", which is quite unusual, and which are only a part of the Netherlands, but not the whole kingdom, which also includes the provinties of Zeeland, Limburg, Flevoland, Groningen, Utrecht, Noord-Brabant (but not Zuid-Brabant), Drente, Fryslân, Gelderland and Overijssel. But colloquially, the whole kingdom of the Netherlands is called Holland.
Which is strange, as of today, only 6% of all people in the Netherlands identify themselves als Muslim. Apparently each muslim woman has the same number of children as 16 non-muslim women together. And we know, that second generation muslim women have about the same birthrate than other women in the same country with the same socio-economic status. So if we estimate that about 30% of all muslims in the Netherlands are first-generation, we have a birth rate for first generation muslim women that amounts to 50 times the birthrate of the average woman in the Netherlands (which is 1.8 btw.). I wonder why the news papers aren't full of reports of muslim women with 90 children?
Neither. It's purely informative. Messerschmitt is still active as a company, after several fusions (from Messerschmitt to Messerschmitt-Bölkow-Blohm to MBB-ENRO, DASA (part of DaimlerChrysler) to EADS) it's now part of the Airbus group.
Don't forget to wear the white cap whenever you enter an Airbus!
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, tomatos are fruits, more specificically, they are berries.
Last time I checked, T-Mobile was a german provider, headquartered in Bonn, Germany. T-Mobile US is (after the merger with MetroPCS) 74% owned by T-Mobile Germany.
Some countries have an internal carbon market, some trade zones (e.g. the E.U.) have them. That's fine, but the Paris Agreement does not demand having carbon markets.
The Paris Agreement was a self-commitment of all signing countries to limit the increase in global temperatures to 2 degrees Celsius until the year 2100. Not more, nothing less. If Climate Change was non existant, or a naturally occuring phenomenom, the U.S. could simply keep the agreement because either the global climate doesn't change at all, or the climate change is so slow (previous climate changes took ten thousands of years to happen), that there is no reason to fear anything within the next 100 years.
At no point in the agreement there was any mentioning of wealth or the redistribution of it.
But with a few companies having a quite complete picture about everything you are up online, it will be more and more difficult to develop something revolutionary (pardon: disruptive) without them noticing. And with their superior manpower they might be able to beat any small group of developers to market.
Not for a given time period, except the time period is 150 years or longer.
With a smooth surface, you have the elementary law of reflection: incoming angle equals outgoing angle. That means that only the sound wave that hits the glass plane at exactly 90 degrees will be reflected back into the direction it came from. Thus only the bats flying straight to the glass window will detect it with echo-location. Any bat flying in an arbitrary angle to the plane will not hear the echo, as it is directed away from the bat.
A brick wall has lots of different angles, and the probability is very high that at least some part of the brick wall will reflect the echo back to the source.
Basicly this is the same effect stealth technology uses to make objects invisible to radar: plane surfaces will not reflect anything back to the source except for the quite improbable case to be hit directly at a 90 degree angle.
If we look at the conditions of a fair election, we have certain criteria to be met. Elections should be fair, meaning that voting should be no undue burden to each of the voters. Elections should be free, meaning no one should be able to force you to vote a certain way. Elections should be equal, meaning, that each vote counts the same, votes are not tampered with, and no additional votes should be added (e.g. ballot stuffing or changing invalid votes into valid ones).
The problem with e-voting is that it can't warrant free and equal at the same time. If voting is free, no one should be able to know how you have voted, and you should not be able to keep any proof how you voted. Because if you could prove your vote, a "voting enforcer" could either pay you if you provide proof to have voted correctly, or punish you for not having the proof. For e-voting that means that there should be no electronic or physic trail from a vote back to you. On the other hand, there has to be proof that all valid votes have been counted, no vote has been tampered with, and no additional votes have been added to ensure the equality of votes. How do you keep track of immaterial entities? You can't sign them with the voter's key, otherwise they aren't free anymore. If you sign them with another key, how do you ensure that this key is not used to add votes? And how do you ensure that the votes are really counted the way they were cast? And how do you watch the count? One important argument why to use computers in the first place is to speed up the counting process. I disagree. Counting should never be faster than the watchers can count.
It takes a team of specialists to go through the code of the voting application itself to ensure it does only what it is supposed to do. And the Underhanded C Contest shows how easy it is to hide side effects within code. And this only looks at the application itself. It doesn't even look at the operating system or hardware tampering. Who does audit the millions of lines of code for the operating system and the billions of transistors on today's processors and RAM chips?
Having people watching the sealing of the ballot box and people watching the ballot boxes during the voting process until the seal is broken and the votes are counted by hand, and then the resealing of the boxes and the transport to the central voting office together with the counting tabs, and then watching how the final tab is counted does not require any specialist knowledge.
September 2017 is now, right? No failure today then.
Suse is the german spelling for Susan.
Yes, if fish have the same evolutionary speed than E. coli, we can expect fish to digest plastic correctly within 30,000 to 35,000 generations. It's just about to happen! Wait and see!
Some negative effects that scientists have discovered when fish consume plastic include reduced activity rates and weakened schooling behavior, as well as compromised liver function.
Thus your question is based on a false assumption.
I know what his algorithm does. And for n=1000, it will take more time than a billion universes put together. Thus he will get nothing -- at least not in this Universe.
You can claim your prize as soon as your algorithm put onto a standard computer came up with a solution to the "n queens on an n x n board" with n=1000.
I don't know if such stations exists in the U.S. (besides NPR). At least I didn't find any of them when I was in the U.S. the last time.
Actually, he was trying to prove a point, namely that P <> NP.
Also if P = 0.
And outdated at the same time.
No. Because they stay at home, and you never met them. Thus while people tend to be idiots everywhere (even travelers), you incorrectly assume that the people staying at home are somewhat more smart. This is survivorship bias. You don't have any sufficient data to make conclusions about people staying at home.
Why not give a shining example for your solution and start with yourself? Improvement always starts with oneself.
It works really great in the Philippines right now. Somehow your approach does nothing else than increasing the number of dead people.
Yes, there are two provinties, Noord-Holland and Zuid-Holland, which together you could call "Holland", which is quite unusual, and which are only a part of the Netherlands, but not the whole kingdom, which also includes the provinties of Zeeland, Limburg, Flevoland, Groningen, Utrecht, Noord-Brabant (but not Zuid-Brabant), Drente, Fryslân, Gelderland and Overijssel. But colloquially, the whole kingdom of the Netherlands is called Holland.
Which is strange, as of today, only 6% of all people in the Netherlands identify themselves als Muslim. Apparently each muslim woman has the same number of children as 16 non-muslim women together. And we know, that second generation muslim women have about the same birthrate than other women in the same country with the same socio-economic status. So if we estimate that about 30% of all muslims in the Netherlands are first-generation, we have a birth rate for first generation muslim women that amounts to 50 times the birthrate of the average woman in the Netherlands (which is 1.8 btw.). I wonder why the news papers aren't full of reports of muslim women with 90 children?
Don't forget to wear the white cap whenever you enter an Airbus!
It's Messerschmitt, Focke-Wulf and Volkswagen.