As a german happily living in a democratic and free Germany, I have to disagree. Most more recent "freeing" attempts may have been utter failures, but (proof by example) it is obviously possible to succeed.
I believe that infinitely more insight on what the human body will accept and reject comes from clinical studies and research on implants then from art projects, especially those actually implant technology (i.e. try to connect technology to nerves). From a medicinal standpoint, this professor could as well have implanted a plastic globe.
The inflation in the Weimar Republic was stopped November 1923 with the introduction of the Rentenmark and followed by a period called "Golden Twenties", with a pretty stable currency and economy. I sincerely doubt that the mentioned inflation was a major cause for WWII. It may have played a role, but there were much more important factors.
A practical steam engine fuel has at least the requirements: - high energy density (you don't want a tender full of grass clippings behind your car) - maintenance free fuelling the burning chamber (you don't want to shovel coal) - clean, low emission burn
So basically, you have to process most of your example fuels anyways to be useful. Processing them to anything a conventional diesel engine (or, if you really like ethanol, otto engine) can burn is not a significant loss of efficiency.
Well, the main reasons why otto and diesel engines don't reach the theoretical maximum efficiency of the otto or diesel cycle is that they lose energy to the cooling medium. If you could use some of that heat, you might close the gap between the theoretical maximum efficiency and the practical efficiency. The added weight will of course reduce the gain, but it still might be greater than zero.
Speed Record Cars like this are usually build to run in a straight line on a salt flat. If you don't have wind from the side, there is no need for much stability. Building the car as narrow as possible reduces the area exposed to the wind and thus reduces drag.
Now if you try do drive that thing on a regular road, you'd probably not survive the first turn.
The Cyclone engine may be grat as a waste heat engine, i.e. to convert process heat back to some more useful type of energy. I doubt it's really usefull as primary engine, because converting fuel to heat and then heat to motion does not really sound more efficient than your usual internal combustion engine. And the main advantage "can burn all kind of alternative fuels"? Come on, I can do that with my diesel engine already. Increasing the efficiency of a car with a internal combustion/steam engine hybrid by using the waste heat of a combustion engine to gain some additional power could be a much better idea.
God is a postulate. He can't really be tested for or proven. And postulates have their place in scientific theories.
Postulates have only a value in science if used to prove a thesis under certain assumptions. (e.g. "If P=NP, than breaking RSA is easy"). Unfortunately, the existance of a God does not prove ID in the slightest. I don't see any reason why a God should take the stupid task do design all species one by one. (The non-existance of a God, however, would disprove ID.)
Everyone has the right to individually decide if they believe in a Creator or not. But flatly denying that it is even a possiblity is as much as an unfounded leath of faith as flatly denying he must exist.
Evolution does not per se deny the existance of a Creator. If you want to couple evolution with the belief of a creator, just imagine a Creator that made the rules, and said rules resulted in all the life forms we see today. Even the Pope acknowledges evolution, and I'm pretty sure he firmly believes in a Creator...
The proper scientific approach is to suggest it could be valid as a theory, but can't be tested at this time. Suggesting otherwise is zealoty all the same.
It can not only "not be tested at this time", it can't ever be tested. It is also not a theory. (Wikipedia: "The word theory, when used by scientists, refers to an explanation of reality that has been thoroughly tested so that most scientists agree on it. It can be changed if new information is found.") It's not even a hypothesis, because it is not testable. Suggesting otherwise is a grave misunderstanding of the scientific approach.
So, according to your numbers, 72% of US biology highschool teachers teach ID as potentially valid "theory". If that's "not so bleak", I don't know what is.
If you want your kids to be taught about evolution so desperately, run your own little class on saturdays (or even sundays). Take the debate on yourself.
Or move to europe. I'ts kind of unthinkable that there could be schools not teaching evolution. Every time someone even slightly hinted at the possibility at teaching something else, the resulting public outcry removed him from his office.
It will certainly meet european crash test requirements. However, those impose pretty different requirements than the US test*, so it might be hard to meet both standards with such little weight.
*European crash tests basically mimic collisions between cars by ramming a deformable barrier with 60% offset at 64km/h, US crash test is full front against a concrete wall at 58 km/h. European tests basically force you to have a strong, non deforming passenger cell, US tests focus much more on the restraint systems and ways to dampen the deceleration.
Well, basically by disabling cookies Incognito mode loggs off your Facebook session, so the test (correctly) determines you are not logged in. Thus, you do not break the test itself.
If that's the same thing is debateable, I admit. But as the technique's potential might go beyond checking Cookie-based logons, I think the difference is worth pointing out.
I doubt that halps against the technique presented in TFA, because it does not depend on Cookies or anything that is blocked in Incognito mode. Basically, they only rely to a HTTP request to the site to be checked, using JavaScript to determine the HTTP status. Thus, disabling JavaScript helps. The Firefox Addon "Request Policy" should, according to the autor of TFA, help, too.
When I tried to bump my parents internet to broad band a few years ago they were like, why pay more for that?
That's part of the problem in the US ISP market. Here, broadband is actually cheaper then dialup. Dialup was approximately about EUR 25/month plus 0.05 EUR/minute, now I'm paying about 25 EUR for 16 MBit/s DSL with unlimited traffic (both including a landline).
no no no, it's almost, but not quite, entirely unlike the EVIL-bit. The Do-Not-Track header is set by the client, so it would be more like a PLEASE-DO-NOT-ATTACK-bit in every message to a possible attacker.
I don't believe you are correct. I've (luckily) never been in a situation where any order was even close to be illegal, but from what I've heard by soldiers who have been to deploymed to war-like zones, it sometimes does happen that soldiers disobey. The legal situation (here in Germany) is a little bit complex, and my english is not quite good enough to write a adequate description, but the possibilities of soldiers to disobey due to "freedom of conscience" are quite generous.
As the higher levels of command are quite aware of the law and the repercussions from braking that law, they usualy play by the rules about these issues. And as any disciplinary action will be escalated to these tiers of command pretty quickly, you are not very likely to face "serious military prison time" or anything similar.
There has been a case where a major disobeyed an order to develop a software, that he believed would be used to support the war in iraq, and he believed this war to be against international law. The case went to court, and it was decided that it was the right of major to disobey in that case (AZ: BVerwG 2 WD 12.04)
Disclaimer: This describes the situation in Germany, and may not translate to other armies.
Slashdot Mirror
As a german happily living in a democratic and free Germany, I have to disagree. Most more recent "freeing" attempts may have been utter failures, but (proof by example) it is obviously possible to succeed.
I believe that infinitely more insight on what the human body will accept and reject comes from clinical studies and research on implants then from art projects, especially those actually implant technology (i.e. try to connect technology to nerves). From a medicinal standpoint, this professor could as well have implanted a plastic globe.
Non sequitur.
Things that are neither practical, reasonable or logical may be art, but they may as well be simply stupid.
According to the German Spiegel, Alberto Torres (responsible board member for MeeGo) just left the board. So yeah, MeeGo is basically left for dead.
Innovate or die.
And according to these charts, they are starting to innovate by cutting R&D spending.
Nokia, you've come a long way from rubber boots and bicycle tyres to mobile phones. But I fear this is where the story starts to end.
The inflation in the Weimar Republic was stopped November 1923 with the introduction of the Rentenmark and followed by a period called "Golden Twenties", with a pretty stable currency and economy. I sincerely doubt that the mentioned inflation was a major cause for WWII. It may have played a role, but there were much more important factors.
Oblig. XKCD
A practical steam engine fuel has at least the requirements:
- high energy density (you don't want a tender full of grass clippings behind your car)
- maintenance free fuelling the burning chamber (you don't want to shovel coal)
- clean, low emission burn
So basically, you have to process most of your example fuels anyways to be useful. Processing them to anything a conventional diesel engine (or, if you really like ethanol, otto engine) can burn is not a significant loss of efficiency.
Well, the main reasons why otto and diesel engines don't reach the theoretical maximum efficiency of the otto or diesel cycle is that they lose energy to the cooling medium. If you could use some of that heat, you might close the gap between the theoretical maximum efficiency and the practical efficiency. The added weight will of course reduce the gain, but it still might be greater than zero.
Speed Record Cars like this are usually build to run in a straight line on a salt flat. If you don't have wind from the side, there is no need for much stability. Building the car as narrow as possible reduces the area exposed to the wind and thus reduces drag.
Now if you try do drive that thing on a regular road, you'd probably not survive the first turn.
The Cyclone engine may be grat as a waste heat engine, i.e. to convert process heat back to some more useful type of energy. I doubt it's really usefull as primary engine, because converting fuel to heat and then heat to motion does not really sound more efficient than your usual internal combustion engine. And the main advantage "can burn all kind of alternative fuels"? Come on, I can do that with my diesel engine already. Increasing the efficiency of a car with a internal combustion/steam engine hybrid by using the waste heat of a combustion engine to gain some additional power could be a much better idea.
I think that at least the big advertising networks like Google will comply, and coincidentally those are the ones that do most of the tracking.
The proposed FTC regulation
At this level of abstraction, the only difference between "arrays of light globes" and OLED display is the size of the pixels.
God is a postulate. He can't really be tested for or proven. And postulates have their place in scientific theories.
Postulates have only a value in science if used to prove a thesis under certain assumptions. (e.g. "If P=NP, than breaking RSA is easy"). Unfortunately, the existance of a God does not prove ID in the slightest. I don't see any reason why a God should take the stupid task do design all species one by one. (The non-existance of a God, however, would disprove ID.)
Everyone has the right to individually decide if they believe in a Creator or not. But flatly denying that it is even a possiblity is as much as an unfounded leath of faith as flatly denying he must exist.
Evolution does not per se deny the existance of a Creator. If you want to couple evolution with the belief of a creator, just imagine a Creator that made the rules, and said rules resulted in all the life forms we see today. Even the Pope acknowledges evolution, and I'm pretty sure he firmly believes in a Creator...
The proper scientific approach is to suggest it could be valid as a theory, but can't be tested at this time. Suggesting otherwise is zealoty all the same.
It can not only "not be tested at this time", it can't ever be tested. It is also not a theory. (Wikipedia: "The word theory, when used by scientists, refers to an explanation of reality that has been thoroughly tested so that most scientists agree on it. It can be changed if new information is found.") It's not even a hypothesis, because it is not testable. Suggesting otherwise is a grave misunderstanding of the scientific approach.
So, according to your numbers, 72% of US biology highschool teachers teach ID as potentially valid "theory". If that's "not so bleak", I don't know what is.
If you want your kids to be taught about evolution so desperately, run your own little class on saturdays (or even sundays). Take the debate on yourself.
Or move to europe. I'ts kind of unthinkable that there could be schools not teaching evolution. Every time someone even slightly hinted at the possibility at teaching something else, the resulting public outcry removed him from his office.
It will certainly meet european crash test requirements. However, those impose pretty different requirements than the US test*, so it might be hard to meet both standards with such little weight.
*European crash tests basically mimic collisions between cars by ramming a deformable barrier with 60% offset at 64km/h, US crash test is full front against a concrete wall at 58 km/h. European tests basically force you to have a strong, non deforming passenger cell, US tests focus much more on the restraint systems and ways to dampen the deceleration.
Well, basically by disabling cookies Incognito mode loggs off your Facebook session, so the test (correctly) determines you are not logged in. Thus, you do not break the test itself.
If that's the same thing is debateable, I admit. But as the technique's potential might go beyond checking Cookie-based logons, I think the difference is worth pointing out.
I doubt that halps against the technique presented in TFA, because it does not depend on Cookies or anything that is blocked in Incognito mode. Basically, they only rely to a HTTP request to the site to be checked, using JavaScript to determine the HTTP status. Thus, disabling JavaScript helps. The Firefox Addon "Request Policy" should, according to the autor of TFA, help, too.
Link to Google cache
Surprisingly, this was fixed pretty fast (the cheap way, by removing the user name from the sidebar, but at least fixed)
When I tried to bump my parents internet to broad band a few years ago they were like, why pay more for that?
That's part of the problem in the US ISP market. Here, broadband is actually cheaper then dialup. Dialup was approximately about EUR 25/month plus 0.05 EUR/minute, now I'm paying about 25 EUR for 16 MBit/s DSL with unlimited traffic (both including a landline).
no no no, it's almost, but not quite, entirely unlike the EVIL-bit. The Do-Not-Track header is set by the client, so it would be more like a PLEASE-DO-NOT-ATTACK-bit in every message to a possible attacker.
I don't believe you are correct. I've (luckily) never been in a situation where any order was even close to be illegal, but from what I've heard by soldiers who have been to deploymed to war-like zones, it sometimes does happen that soldiers disobey. The legal situation (here in Germany) is a little bit complex, and my english is not quite good enough to write a adequate description, but the possibilities of soldiers to disobey due to "freedom of conscience" are quite generous.
As the higher levels of command are quite aware of the law and the repercussions from braking that law, they usualy play by the rules about these issues. And as any disciplinary action will be escalated to these tiers of command pretty quickly, you are not very likely to face "serious military prison time" or anything similar.
There has been a case where a major disobeyed an order to develop a software, that he believed would be used to support the war in iraq, and he believed this war to be against international law. The case went to court, and it was decided that it was the right of major to disobey in that case (AZ: BVerwG 2 WD 12.04)
Disclaimer: This describes the situation in Germany, and may not translate to other armies.