Your argument is the asteroid that killed the dinosaurs was huge. So it would necessarily take one as big to cause significant damage, and thus take too much laser to move. Thus, the laser must be for only weapons.
What if a 2 km square meteor could cause catastrophic damage, and could easily be mitigated through lasers. Is it worth putting lasers in the sky that could mitigate the disaster while also destroying space junk at the cost of militarizing space?
(Note: the answer lies in the fact you already think there are lasers up there)
We value it for lawns. That means games: soccer, swing sets, volleyball, etc, etc... We have enough urban sprawl that we can even have a garden if we so choose, but it is not a huge cost savings as produce prices drop when they are "in season" in any case. Adding extra land is not huge benefit really, except maybe in making a larger football field. But it is a huge loss of windows all around, especially in two story homes with large vaulted ceilings and huge windows.
People like to equate our oil needs with our electric needs. Maybe I'm misinformed, but they don't seem to equate. If we found a completely free source of electricity, that used a large building to produce, we wouldn't get rid of our oil demand. We would get rid of our coal demand. Electric transportation still suffers from battery issues at the moment. At some point in the future cheap electricity might reduce our oil demand, but with urban sprawl and the current shortcomings of electric transport, I don't see this happening soon.
The problem is that so many things are suspicious to the superstitious and uninformed. Your arduino board looks an awfully lot like a bomb to some laman. I mean there are wires and a circuit board. I saw that on NCIS once, it must be a bomb!!!
There are quite a few comments to the tune of "Even if it is active HIV, at least it's better for them than their cancer." While this is likely the case, I'm not sure it's better for society than the cancer. More testing needs to be done. But it's not worth saving 1 life, if they on average give HIV to 3 people after being treated. or is it?
I'm not sure where you live, but in Argentina CNG is very common. All the Taxis in Buenos Aires run on CNG and their are plenty of gas stations with CNG pumps. If you are in the US, well you're SOL until the infrastructure changes.
I followed their steps, except I don't have any History to delete. Wasn't this an opt-in thing? I know I never opted-in/out and I don't have any history myself.
In the US you really have 2 sources that can meet demand: Coal - known to be the most dangerous deaths/KW of the power supplies. Radioactive waste goes into environment and causes cancer Nuclear - Waste is sealed up, and even in Fukushima style catastrophes causes less deaths/KW than other energy sources.
I'm not a filesystem guru. I stick to programming in the application space mostly. But I have noticed a large time discrepency compiling a large project using EXT4 vs NTFS. EXT4 being multiple times faster then doing the same compile on an NTFS. My question now is, will ReFS bring those times up to similar values?
PS. Also looking at the dropped support for short names, i think quite a few server batch files will be broken.
While I doubt it really cost all 27k of them any emotional distress, it could possibly cause dissidents in other countries some distress. Think activists in China. Although china already has complete control behind the great firewall of china.
It was served with an HTTP 304 code (meaning “unmodified”) which suggests the favicon was already in someone’s cache. That means the page had previously been loaded.
This means they were going back to check the blog before publishing and it hadn't changed. This could happen from a laptop that had previously read his blog at home and then at work they opened up their laptop to verify they stole his ideas correctly.
In most countries, isn't it illegal to not report a crime that you're aware of?
In this case, the blogger wasn't reporting new information on a crime. He was defaming a person for being "involved" in a crime that had taken place and was already tried in the past. If you witnessed a murder, you might be said to be "involved" in the murder. I might then blog and hint at a more sinister involvement, but only ever state the facts. Is that ok? Even if I get you fired?
I'm not saying that the complainant didn't have nefarious "involvements" in the aforementioned crime. But we don't know that, and he wasn't the one sentenced for the crimes.
Now the question is again: is it ok to state the truth and keep mud slinging? (personally I like the somewhat ambiguous law that lets the jury decide. They have the time to dedicate to seeing both sides and finding the truth.)
Now you're down to maybe a single month for a wealthy individual to be able to crack a significant, real-world password.
Checking their stickie notes on their monitor because they can't remember hard passwords is easier. Or just brute-force dictionary attack + mined dates/family names from the oh so secure facebook. This is all currently available and much EASIER than any hack that takes large computational power.
Disclaimer: Dictionary attacks can take a while, but given all the meta-data from facebook, we're still talking under a month on a personal computer in most cases.
$3.7 million is the amount of admission fees received at Stanford for students that did NOT get accepted. I think that more than covers teh admission offices expenses for selection. But honestly why wouldn't they want more people applying, they don't have to read every essay, just the actual potential candidates.
The clear and present danger doesn't come from *talking* about the actions of the American government, but from the actions themselves.
You make a blanket statement without giving any specifics. To play the devils advocate I will give an example where you are just plain wrong.
We have a group of people named "kill everyone good". This group is secrative and the leader is unknown. The government plants a mole in their group to uncover their leader.
In the previous scenario, is the actions of that government dangerous? or is it the publishing of the mole's name and information?
Obviously I could propose an example where the information is only dangerous to the government as they were unequivocally in the wrong.
Giving specific examples of where they did wrong and/or where the information may endanger people is much more interesting to this conversation then just saying the government is wrong.
I'm tired of kids coming to school and not learning and getting credit for it
Reason I got Ds in high school.
Teachers insisting I do busy work for them and grade the majority of the grade on busy work even after Acing their testes. This is so they don't have to teach during class and can watch us do menial work.
I know I might be an outlier, but Ds for me didn't mean anything about my knowledge of the subject matter.
Slashdot Mirror
Poor also don't have the money to get the subsidy for the Tesla cars. They're missing out on like 10 thousand dollars!!!!
Your argument is the asteroid that killed the dinosaurs was huge. So it would necessarily take one as big to cause significant damage, and thus take too much laser to move. Thus, the laser must be for only weapons.
What if a 2 km square meteor could cause catastrophic damage, and could easily be mitigated through lasers. Is it worth putting lasers in the sky that could mitigate the disaster while also destroying space junk at the cost of militarizing space?
(Note: the answer lies in the fact you already think there are lasers up there)
Depends on your definition of security. If you want the government spying on all your emails, hen blackberry is the way to go.
What they don't tell you is that on other occasions he lost 20 million.
We value it for lawns. That means games: soccer, swing sets, volleyball, etc, etc... We have enough urban sprawl that we can even have a garden if we so choose, but it is not a huge cost savings as produce prices drop when they are "in season" in any case. Adding extra land is not huge benefit really, except maybe in making a larger football field. But it is a huge loss of windows all around, especially in two story homes with large vaulted ceilings and huge windows.
People like to equate our oil needs with our electric needs. Maybe I'm misinformed, but they don't seem to equate. If we found a completely free source of electricity, that used a large building to produce, we wouldn't get rid of our oil demand. We would get rid of our coal demand. Electric transportation still suffers from battery issues at the moment. At some point in the future cheap electricity might reduce our oil demand, but with urban sprawl and the current shortcomings of electric transport, I don't see this happening soon.
The problem is that so many things are suspicious to the superstitious and uninformed. Your arduino board looks an awfully lot like a bomb to some laman. I mean there are wires and a circuit board. I saw that on NCIS once, it must be a bomb!!!
Not really, which is why I am for smoking bans in public.
There are quite a few comments to the tune of "Even if it is active HIV, at least it's better for them than their cancer." While this is likely the case, I'm not sure it's better for society than the cancer. More testing needs to be done. But it's not worth saving 1 life, if they on average give HIV to 3 people after being treated. or is it?
I'm not sure where you live, but in Argentina CNG is very common. All the Taxis in Buenos Aires run on CNG and their are plenty of gas stations with CNG pumps. If you are in the US, well you're SOL until the infrastructure changes.
I followed their steps, except I don't have any History to delete. Wasn't this an opt-in thing? I know I never opted-in/out and I don't have any history myself.
Good guys 2
Bad guys 20000000000
Now that we have asserted our right to privacy, shot down SOPA, PIPA, and ACTA (more work needed in the US), what's next?
In the US you really have 2 sources that can meet demand:
Coal - known to be the most dangerous deaths/KW of the power supplies. Radioactive waste goes into environment and causes cancer
Nuclear - Waste is sealed up, and even in Fukushima style catastrophes causes less deaths/KW than other energy sources.
You decide
I'm not a filesystem guru. I stick to programming in the application space mostly. But I have noticed a large time discrepency compiling a large project using EXT4 vs NTFS. EXT4 being multiple times faster then doing the same compile on an NTFS. My question now is, will ReFS bring those times up to similar values?
PS. Also looking at the dropped support for short names, i think quite a few server batch files will be broken.
While I doubt it really cost all 27k of them any emotional distress, it could possibly cause dissidents in other countries some distress. Think activists in China. Although china already has complete control behind the great firewall of china.
It was served with an HTTP 304 code (meaning “unmodified”) which suggests the favicon was already in someone’s cache. That means the page had previously been loaded.
This means they were going back to check the blog before publishing and it hadn't changed. This could happen from a laptop that had previously read his blog at home and then at work they opened up their laptop to verify they stole his ideas correctly.
In most countries, isn't it illegal to not report a crime that you're aware of?
In this case, the blogger wasn't reporting new information on a crime. He was defaming a person for being "involved" in a crime that had taken place and was already tried in the past. If you witnessed a murder, you might be said to be "involved" in the murder. I might then blog and hint at a more sinister involvement, but only ever state the facts. Is that ok? Even if I get you fired?
I'm not saying that the complainant didn't have nefarious "involvements" in the aforementioned crime. But we don't know that, and he wasn't the one sentenced for the crimes.
Now the question is again: is it ok to state the truth and keep mud slinging? (personally I like the somewhat ambiguous law that lets the jury decide. They have the time to dedicate to seeing both sides and finding the truth.)
MSE is nice, and performs well, but doesn't support windows XP 64. Go figure.
Now you're down to maybe a single month for a wealthy individual to be able to crack a significant, real-world password.
Checking their stickie notes on their monitor because they can't remember hard passwords is easier. Or just brute-force dictionary attack + mined dates/family names from the oh so secure facebook. This is all currently available and much EASIER than any hack that takes large computational power.
Disclaimer: Dictionary attacks can take a while, but given all the meta-data from facebook, we're still talking under a month on a personal computer in most cases.
$3.7 million is the amount of admission fees received at Stanford for students that did NOT get accepted. I think that more than covers teh admission offices expenses for selection. But honestly why wouldn't they want more people applying, they don't have to read every essay, just the actual potential candidates.
Only poor people pay taxes.
Is that why the top 10% of our country pays 70% of all income tax? and why the bottom 50% of the country only pay 2.5% of all federal income tax?
Source: http://www.ntu.org/tax-basics/who-pays-income-taxes.html
Tax evasion is still tax evasion and we shouldn't put up with it.
cron job. need I say more?
The clear and present danger doesn't come from *talking* about the actions of the American government, but from the actions themselves.
You make a blanket statement without giving any specifics. To play the devils advocate I will give an example where you are just plain wrong. We have a group of people named "kill everyone good". This group is secrative and the leader is unknown. The government plants a mole in their group to uncover their leader. In the previous scenario, is the actions of that government dangerous? or is it the publishing of the mole's name and information? Obviously I could propose an example where the information is only dangerous to the government as they were unequivocally in the wrong. Giving specific examples of where they did wrong and/or where the information may endanger people is much more interesting to this conversation then just saying the government is wrong.
I'm tired of kids coming to school and not learning and getting credit for it
Reason I got Ds in high school. Teachers insisting I do busy work for them and grade the majority of the grade on busy work even after Acing their testes. This is so they don't have to teach during class and can watch us do menial work. I know I might be an outlier, but Ds for me didn't mean anything about my knowledge of the subject matter.