Don't the NSA report, directly or indirectly, to the President? So if executive branch support a measure to limit bulk surveillance, couldn't they, of their own initiative, direct the appropriate agencies to cancel or modify the mass surveillance programs?
At least where I live, prescription glasses are tax-free medical devices; ironic glasses are taxed fashion accessories.
Of course the tax is far less than the cost of prescription lenses, but if you're going to wear glasses anyway the government is literally subsidizing not getting Lasik.
I don't want it all for free, but I think companies should be honest about their business model. I think they should distinguish between "Free" trial, "Free" with paid upgrades, "Free" ad-supported, etc.
Based on the number of "please click here to continue getting our newsletter" messages I've been getting in my inbox, other companies don't seem to think the sky is falling.
In this test, both took exponentially longer. So either the d-wave doesn't work, or as the manufacturer has claimed, the problems were not setup to demonstrate the class of problems where the d-wave will show better performance relative to problem complexity growth than a conventional computer.
Or the maximum problem size handled by the machine is too small so see the sub-exponential growth. Complexity theory deals with performance on very large data sets, and, if I remember correctly, the D-wave machine is limited to a small problem size (max a hundred or so qbits)
It kind of looks like the appeal court decision is setting this up for a potential appeal to the Supreme Court. The decision repeatedly talks about differences and conflicting rulings between different Circuits, which is one of the things the Supreme Court looks for when deciding whether to approve an apeal.
He probably didn't show the label because posting personally identifying information on the Internet is generally a bad idea, especially if you're in temporary possession of a $100K+ item.
And I'm not sure where you're coming from about trying to make the Feds look bad. Having a package mis-delivered by UPS or a call ring through to voicemail are hardly scandalous.
Slashdot Mirror
Given Tesla's eco-friendly marking, this would probably be a bonus for a TeraFactory.
Don't the NSA report, directly or indirectly, to the President? So if executive branch support a measure to limit bulk surveillance, couldn't they, of their own initiative, direct the appropriate agencies to cancel or modify the mass surveillance programs?
At least where I live, prescription glasses are tax-free medical devices; ironic glasses are taxed fashion accessories.
Of course the tax is far less than the cost of prescription lenses, but if you're going to wear glasses anyway the government is literally subsidizing not getting Lasik.
I don't want it all for free, but I think companies should be honest about their business model. I think they should distinguish between "Free" trial, "Free" with paid upgrades, "Free" ad-supported, etc.
Sounds like your ex's workpace needs to unionize.
Is it repeated, unwanted, attention of a sexual nature? Then it's sexual harassment.
Based on the number of "please click here to continue getting our newsletter" messages I've been getting in my inbox, other companies don't seem to think the sky is falling.
In this test, both took exponentially longer. So either the d-wave doesn't work, or as the manufacturer has claimed, the problems were not setup to demonstrate the class of problems where the d-wave will show better performance relative to problem complexity growth than a conventional computer.
Or the maximum problem size handled by the machine is too small so see the sub-exponential growth. Complexity theory deals with performance on very large data sets, and, if I remember correctly, the D-wave machine is limited to a small problem size (max a hundred or so qbits)
Everything is worth what its purchaser will pay for it.
-- Publilius Syrus
Keep in mind the Supreme Court of BC is a trial court (despite the high sounding name). This could still be overturned on appeal.
Women don't talk about poetry, math, and chess?
This alternate test sounds really easy:
Q: Add 34957 to 70764.
ELIZA: Don't you ever say Hello?
Man: What does this have to do with being a woman?
It kind of looks like the appeal court decision is setting this up for a potential appeal to the Supreme Court. The decision repeatedly talks about differences and conflicting rulings between different Circuits, which is one of the things the Supreme Court looks for when deciding whether to approve an apeal.
He probably didn't show the label because posting personally identifying information on the Internet is generally a bad idea, especially if you're in temporary possession of a $100K+ item.
And I'm not sure where you're coming from about trying to make the Feds look bad. Having a package mis-delivered by UPS or a call ring through to voicemail are hardly scandalous.
Pornography featuring children (RTFA) does not belong. The others prey on people who should know better.