A "hairline crack" in a correctly designed pressure vessel will do nothing but leak. Otherwise known as leak-before-break. It will only explode (from the pressure, fatigue, corrosion) if it is poorly designed. Now of course the danger from ignition of the leaked gas is another issue, but that is an issue we already have with gasoline since gasoline fumes are extremely flamable.
I'd post a link but all the good articles seem to be.pdf and I figure it is bad form to post a link to a document. Search "leak before break" if you're interested.
"Stiff" in this case doesn't have to mean that the final textile product and garment is actually inflexible. There is a lot more to the design of the textile that determines that. A lot of factors come into play in the design of the textile and then the final garment. Stiffness is one, but so is ultimate strength, elongation or stretch ratio, density and toughness not to mention fiber size (the "nano" here is the real important part").
Fortunatly you didn't give any details so there is no question, I hope, that I'm making an actual assessment of your arguements. That said...
Somewhere right now there is a guy saying the EXACT SAME THING about some joker who kept "arguing his points again and again to get people to agree with him, no matter what it was."
disagree, now after like 3 months, on the multi-task button. When intentionally moving between apps, such as copy-pasting (either electronically or using gray matter) it is much faster using the multi-task button. I swore for months that it was useless, until one day i got annoyed as I was switching between two apps on different home screens and BAM my love affair with the multi-task was born.
Now... now I can't imagine not having it.
But of course, different strokes for different folks. But I think everyone likes consistency so on that we are 100% in agreement.
A worthy post right up until, "Of course, some judges are activist judges, but that is a different story."
Let me rewrite that for you, "Of course, some judges make decisions with which I disagree."
The only difference between an "activist" judge and a non-"activist" judge seems to be a commentator's agreement or disagreement with the judges ruling.
DING DING DING... if only I weren't really jsut waiting on tender hooks for the official Google Tablet announcement!!! Oh to have the money to buy both:(
Indeed that is not good. And won't be solved having the schools "over there" either. Not sayign you suggested that, just coming back to one of my points. That said, then the problem is one of execution and setting expectations. And well, frankly, maybe a problem of numbers. But it is hard to say, "oh we'll limit the number to just 10 so they can't stay in their own little cultural group"... but that is my kneejerk reaction to the picture you paint; which is one I too have seen if I'm honest:(
And this is why i think it is great once I get passed my lizard-brain knee-jerk jingoism living in all our hearts. Give my pre-frontal cortex a chance to way into the discussion and I think this is great.
My one concern is the last line of the summery, "Both Duke and New York University are building campuses in the Shanghai area to offer full-time programs to students there" NOOOOO that defeats the point!!! The only way you get the benefits you describe is if they learn in the U.S., immersed in the culture. More jingoism perhaps, but if you want shared values to be shared then they have to learn the full spectrum, morning noon and night, surounded by people who grew up with those values. Not just an instructor and TA who may, or more likely may not, actually be born and bread Americans. And no I don't mean caucasions, I mean cultural Americans of all ethnic backgrounds.
I don't know if Chinese-American instructors would be good or bad in this case because there might be too much cultural constructive-inteference unless the Chinese-American instructor is like 2nd or 3rd generation. I'd say the same thing about X-American teaching X-ian students. The whole point here is to completely immerse the student in the "other" culture and not reenforce what they already know. Then again, if they are fully immersed in the "other" culture in all other aspects, then having an instructor who can relate a little closer to the students own native culture might be an important bridge.
As a final caveat, I say Americans because that is what the article is about. I would say the same thing really about any country/culture that shares the same basic values: individual freedoms, democracy, capitalism, self-determination etc.
I may now have heard of it but I can promise you one thing: I have never visited nor will I ever. No click counts, no ad impressions, nothing. The only thing they might get from me is a bump in google ranking due to links (if I actually created links) but that would ONLY be the result of propogating this very story, a story that is not going to help them in the long run, even if it helps them in the short run. I do however now know who The Oatmeal is:)
DING DING DING Mod parent up. Now make no mistake, part of their internal accounting might include revenue lost from Bad-Press(tm) by just naming names vs revenue gained due to good-press by not naming names. But a good part of it is surely the ongoing cost of complying vs the "one-time" cost of fighting and not having to comply ever again.
While you are surely correct in some respects, you should consider that in your Billybob example, good ol' Billybob is likely smart enough to know to keep his mouth shut. The more likely "concern" for companies are when two people both assume they have been dealt with fairly and without favortism suddenly find out one of them has been screwed. OF course "screwed" is a relative term because you enter into the employment contract you agreed to and if you think you could have gotten better that is your own fault for agreeing.
The real issue is that without all information available to a prosptective employee they have no way of knowing if they could have gotten better and that is the crux of the problem, companies unfairly restricting the free flow of info of the labor pool.
"If that's the case, prove it's not a divinely created quantum vacuum. "
I don't need to prove it is not a divinely created quantum vacuum because that is not my assertion, that is yours, so why don't YOU prove it?
What *I* need to do is: 1) Work towards defining the source of that vacuum by forming a hypothesis, seeking evidence, distilling that into a theory, testing that theory in a way that can falsify it and making predictions, test those predictions in a way that can be falsified, have other scientists do the same, and when new evidence shows my theory to be inaccurate I have to think about why that is, come up with an explanation, and start testing all over again. 2) I need to NOT make up a source of the quantum vacuum and then stop all rational thought because well, "a supernatural being did it so why bother asking any more questions or seeking any more answers."
"If I'm wrong, I loose nothing. If I'm right, you lose everything."
Actually that is not true, Descartes was wrong. As another great philosopher said:
"And what if we picked the wrong religion? Every week, we're just making God madder and madder!" --Homer (aka Simpson)
You see, easy as it might be to dismiss my comment because of the source quote, that fact is Homer's logic is 100% just as valid as Descartes'
OH and you DO lose something if you believe and you are wrong... you lose your entire life living by someone else's mandates, possibly eschewing relationships with an out-group, possibly hating yourself if you are not like the in-group, wasting time (church and prayer) and money (tithe), and pretty much avoiding a whole lot of fun based on things called "sin".
If there is a god I still don't lose anything because I believe that if there actually is a supernatural being that created everything we know, that being 1) doesn't give a crap about me, what I think, or what I do. I also don't think that being will judge me for using my free will and critical thinking to demand evidence before blindly following what another human tells me. Because like it or not, there is no actual evidence that any religious texts were anything more than the result of human thought and action.
While trolling around my Galaxy Nexus I found the ability to encrypt it (not using it though). At the least that should protect data on the phone, surely you can find more details about that feature on the intertubes.
Calls are already "secure" to a point but if you need even more security then perhaps Skype?
No, you look at the 30 day and One Child policy and ask if the outcome of those are good not to mention constitutional. My point is you don't act like the rest of the world does not exist. You don't simply dismiss something because it is Not Invented Here(tm)
No he uses his unique interpretation of the Constitution. As for referencing the laws of foreign countries... so what? So long as those laws would be considered constitutional within 2 stddev of the accepted definition then what is the problem? Yes, the subtext here is that I do not think Scalia is often within 2 stddevs of the accepted defintion of constituational.
Beyond that, referencing foreign laws can also be reworded as, referenced laws already contemplated by other learned legislators and legal scholars with similar world views (ie individual liberty, freedom from oppression etc). Unless of course she is referencing Syrian Law or other similar locale; I don't think she is. It is called Jurisprudence and she is casting a wider net than simply the 50 states as any worthy legal scholar should. Without doing so you risk the opposite problem you are impliying... that is... failure to look at laws in other countries that have gone bad means you risk making the same mistake. Of course my implication is that a failure to look at laws that have worked out means you are blind to solutions and denying yourself evidence withwhich to make a decision.
yes the "rub" as in rubs me the wrong way. I'm very much aware of the facts you state, hence my comment about donating a gonad to break out of that RICO circle.
Slashdot Mirror
A "hairline crack" in a correctly designed pressure vessel will do nothing but leak. Otherwise known as leak-before-break. It will only explode (from the pressure, fatigue, corrosion) if it is poorly designed. Now of course the danger from ignition of the leaked gas is another issue, but that is an issue we already have with gasoline since gasoline fumes are extremely flamable.
I'd post a link but all the good articles seem to be .pdf and I figure it is bad form to post a link to a document. Search "leak before break" if you're interested.
Also a recipie for the dog to be shot by the mono-toothed-redneck-pieces-of-shit.
Obviously the answers are no and yes. They are likely way to small to buy direct and 1) get a good price and 2) even be given the time of day.
"Stiff" in this case doesn't have to mean that the final textile product and garment is actually inflexible. There is a lot more to the design of the textile that determines that. A lot of factors come into play in the design of the textile and then the final garment. Stiffness is one, but so is ultimate strength, elongation or stretch ratio, density and toughness not to mention fiber size (the "nano" here is the real important part").
A decent concept, but SCOTUS does not listen to evidence to decide guilt. They listen to legal arguements to decide constitutionality.
Fortunatly you didn't give any details so there is no question, I hope, that I'm making an actual assessment of your arguements. That said ...
Somewhere right now there is a guy saying the EXACT SAME THING about some joker who kept "arguing his points again and again to get people to agree with him, no matter what it was."
Who knows, he might even be on /. :)
You mean his FIVE-digit slashdot ID right? Or did you find a fancy new factoring algorithm ?
Agree on settings/menu
disagree, now after like 3 months, on the multi-task button. When intentionally moving between apps, such as copy-pasting (either electronically or using gray matter) it is much faster using the multi-task button. I swore for months that it was useless, until one day i got annoyed as I was switching between two apps on different home screens and BAM my love affair with the multi-task was born.
Now ... now I can't imagine not having it.
But of course, different strokes for different folks. But I think everyone likes consistency so on that we are 100% in agreement.
Because a democracy does NOT mean mod rule.
A worthy post right up until, "Of course, some judges are activist judges, but that is a different story."
Let me rewrite that for you, "Of course, some judges make decisions with which I disagree."
The only difference between an "activist" judge and a non-"activist" judge seems to be a commentator's agreement or disagreement with the judges ruling.
DING DING DING ... if only I weren't really jsut waiting on tender hooks for the official Google Tablet announcement!!! Oh to have the money to buy both :(
Indeed that is not good. And won't be solved having the schools "over there" either. Not sayign you suggested that, just coming back to one of my points. That said, then the problem is one of execution and setting expectations. And well, frankly, maybe a problem of numbers. But it is hard to say, "oh we'll limit the number to just 10 so they can't stay in their own little cultural group" ... but that is my kneejerk reaction to the picture you paint; which is one I too have seen if I'm honest :(
And this is why i think it is great once I get passed my lizard-brain knee-jerk jingoism living in all our hearts. Give my pre-frontal cortex a chance to way into the discussion and I think this is great.
My one concern is the last line of the summery, "Both Duke and New York University are building campuses in the Shanghai area to offer full-time programs to students there" NOOOOO that defeats the point!!! The only way you get the benefits you describe is if they learn in the U.S., immersed in the culture. More jingoism perhaps, but if you want shared values to be shared then they have to learn the full spectrum, morning noon and night, surounded by people who grew up with those values. Not just an instructor and TA who may, or more likely may not, actually be born and bread Americans. And no I don't mean caucasions, I mean cultural Americans of all ethnic backgrounds.
I don't know if Chinese-American instructors would be good or bad in this case because there might be too much cultural constructive-inteference unless the Chinese-American instructor is like 2nd or 3rd generation. I'd say the same thing about X-American teaching X-ian students. The whole point here is to completely immerse the student in the "other" culture and not reenforce what they already know. Then again, if they are fully immersed in the "other" culture in all other aspects, then having an instructor who can relate a little closer to the students own native culture might be an important bridge.
As a final caveat, I say Americans because that is what the article is about. I would say the same thing really about any country/culture that shares the same basic values: individual freedoms, democracy, capitalism, self-determination etc.
I may now have heard of it but I can promise you one thing: I have never visited nor will I ever. No click counts, no ad impressions, nothing. The only thing they might get from me is a bump in google ranking due to links (if I actually created links) but that would ONLY be the result of propogating this very story, a story that is not going to help them in the long run, even if it helps them in the short run. I do however now know who The Oatmeal is :)
DING DING DING
Mod parent up. Now make no mistake, part of their internal accounting might include revenue lost from Bad-Press(tm) by just naming names vs revenue gained due to good-press by not naming names. But a good part of it is surely the ongoing cost of complying vs the "one-time" cost of fighting and not having to comply ever again.
"There are people who don't believe a transaction is successful for them unless it hurts the other party"
Aren't these people called sociopaths?
DING DING DING +1 if I had not already replied to this thread.
While you are surely correct in some respects, you should consider that in your Billybob example, good ol' Billybob is likely smart enough to know to keep his mouth shut. The more likely "concern" for companies are when two people both assume they have been dealt with fairly and without favortism suddenly find out one of them has been screwed. OF course "screwed" is a relative term because you enter into the employment contract you agreed to and if you think you could have gotten better that is your own fault for agreeing.
The real issue is that without all information available to a prosptective employee they have no way of knowing if they could have gotten better and that is the crux of the problem, companies unfairly restricting the free flow of info of the labor pool.
I believe corporate / government buyers do.
"Pinkie Pie/Twilight Sparkle Pony Cult Suicide of 2011"
Damn it, you made me actually google that!!!
"If that's the case, prove it's not a divinely created quantum vacuum. "
I don't need to prove it is not a divinely created quantum vacuum because that is not my assertion, that is yours, so why don't YOU prove it?
What *I* need to do is:
1) Work towards defining the source of that vacuum by forming a hypothesis, seeking evidence, distilling that into a theory, testing that theory in a way that can falsify it and making predictions, test those predictions in a way that can be falsified, have other scientists do the same, and when new evidence shows my theory to be inaccurate I have to think about why that is, come up with an explanation, and start testing all over again.
2) I need to NOT make up a source of the quantum vacuum and then stop all rational thought because well, "a supernatural being did it so why bother asking any more questions or seeking any more answers."
"If I'm wrong, I loose nothing. If I'm right, you lose everything."
Actually that is not true, Descartes was wrong. As another great philosopher said:
"And what if we picked the wrong religion? Every week, we're just making God madder and madder!" --Homer (aka Simpson)
You see, easy as it might be to dismiss my comment because of the source quote, that fact is Homer's logic is 100% just as valid as Descartes'
OH and you DO lose something if you believe and you are wrong ... you lose your entire life living by someone else's mandates, possibly eschewing relationships with an out-group, possibly hating yourself if you are not like the in-group, wasting time (church and prayer) and money (tithe), and pretty much avoiding a whole lot of fun based on things called "sin".
If there is a god I still don't lose anything because I believe that if there actually is a supernatural being that created everything we know, that being 1) doesn't give a crap about me, what I think, or what I do. I also don't think that being will judge me for using my free will and critical thinking to demand evidence before blindly following what another human tells me. Because like it or not, there is no actual evidence that any religious texts were anything more than the result of human thought and action.
While trolling around my Galaxy Nexus I found the ability to encrypt it (not using it though). At the least that should protect data on the phone, surely you can find more details about that feature on the intertubes.
Calls are already "secure" to a point but if you need even more security then perhaps Skype?
text ... I'll leave that to others
No, you look at the 30 day and One Child policy and ask if the outcome of those are good not to mention constitutional. My point is you don't act like the rest of the world does not exist. You don't simply dismiss something because it is Not Invented Here(tm)
No he uses his unique interpretation of the Constitution. As for referencing the laws of foreign countries ... so what? So long as those laws would be considered constitutional within 2 stddev of the accepted definition then what is the problem? Yes, the subtext here is that I do not think Scalia is often within 2 stddevs of the accepted defintion of constituational.
Beyond that, referencing foreign laws can also be reworded as, referenced laws already contemplated by other learned legislators and legal scholars with similar world views (ie individual liberty, freedom from oppression etc). Unless of course she is referencing Syrian Law or other similar locale; I don't think she is. It is called Jurisprudence and she is casting a wider net than simply the 50 states as any worthy legal scholar should. Without doing so you risk the opposite problem you are impliying ... that is ... failure to look at laws in other countries that have gone bad means you risk making the same mistake. Of course my implication is that a failure to look at laws that have worked out means you are blind to solutions and denying yourself evidence withwhich to make a decision.
yes the "rub" as in rubs me the wrong way. I'm very much aware of the facts you state, hence my comment about donating a gonad to break out of that RICO circle.