Certainly the men are idealized in the games too. But they're still aimed at male ideals - what men want to be like, more than what women want to look at.
When are we going to find out that all the older reactors similar to Fukushima are shut down safely... Seriously, I have no great problem with the newer designs, but the older ones need phased out, not renewed.
When the NIMBYs stop fighting the deployment of newer designs. As long as pseudo-regulatory barriers erected by the general public make development of new plants based on new designs financially infeasible, companies will stretch the operation of their existing plants far beyond their original design lifespan. It is rather amazing just how much the anti-nuclear movement has made nuclear safety worse.
Cool story bro! You just admitted that the older reactors were unsafe and should not have been built.
No, he said that running an older reactor long past its design lifespan is risky. This is surprising?
If sexual preference is biologically determined, just how is gender a social construct ?
One is what you like, the other is what tag others put on you. They are orthogonal. You might as well ask "if I like red cars, why do restaurants make me wear shoes?"
for example, given a sufficiently hot fire, almost anything can be broken down into atoms which can then be collected into single element molecules and/or simple compounds, which can then be used as raw materials. But big hot fires are not cheap to keep running... yet. I expect if/when we get inexpensive sustainable fusion reactions recycling will get a lot simpler...
It doesn't totally prohibit windshield mounts; it prohibits blocking line of sight out the windshield. There's a couple of spots low down near the pillars that are okay. But a dash mount or console mount is probably simpler.
Of course it's taken from others. I believe the theory is that this kind of stuff comes out of their cut of the transaction processing fee, so it's being taken from the merchant... who may be getting it back from you by charging extra for card transactions (most common with gasoline, that I've seen).
so this prerelease movie with a reportedly "obscure" title character has 4 times the votes as the prerelease movie that's a sequel to a very very well known franchise. Somehow that seems improbable.
As I recall, the problem is that speculative execution alters the state of the CPU and its cache, and there are ways to determine information about that state afterwards that don't involve violating memory access restrictions, like "hey, loading that address didn't take as long as expected, something must've pulled it into the cache already" - that sort of thing. So the question is how much can they make the state act like the speculative execution never happened without actually reaching the point that speculative execution isn't beneficial.
I'm trying to get clarification. You said "if I cannot pay for prioritization" and I'm trying to nail down what you want to be able to prioritize - the bits coming from your ISP to yourself or the bits going from someone else's ISP to them. If you feel that the latter is so clearly not what you meant that it is silly of me to need to ask, that's fine, just say so. But I've seen more "obviously silly" interpretations turn out to be what the poster meant, so I prefer not to make assumptions.
so you'd be fine with me, as a streaming provider, being able to pay your ISP so my bits go faster than Netflix? If not I'm going to assume that the actual answer to the question you breezed by is "as a consumer".
and if their definition of best is simply "most linked to", what then? (This is of course theoretical; it's been a long time since that was the only criteria Google used. But it seems like a reasonable question.)
no, the point of the article is that algorithm training usually carries the implicit assumption that the data used to train is good, in all important ways, but the history of law enforcement has not always been fair, and that causes problems with the algorithm's outputs.
they figure that since a new environment requires new behaviors, it's a good time to fix some old behaviors that the environment doesn't really force change on.
the benefits of competition conflict with the benefits of the network effect. It doesn't help that the tendency for a given piece of entertainment to be on one or a limited number of services means that the services are not so much competing for the market as dividing it up.
Slashdot Mirror
You're conflating "risk at time built" and "risk at time well after design lifespan".
Certainly the men are idealized in the games too. But they're still aimed at male ideals - what men want to be like, more than what women want to look at.
When are we going to find out that all the older reactors similar to Fukushima are shut down safely... Seriously, I have no great problem with the newer designs, but the older ones need phased out, not renewed.
When the NIMBYs stop fighting the deployment of newer designs. As long as pseudo-regulatory barriers erected by the general public make development of new plants based on new designs financially infeasible, companies will stretch the operation of their existing plants far beyond their original design lifespan. It is rather amazing just how much the anti-nuclear movement has made nuclear safety worse.
Cool story bro! You just admitted that the older reactors were unsafe and should not have been built.
No, he said that running an older reactor long past its design lifespan is risky. This is surprising?
If sexual preference is biologically determined, just how is gender a social construct ?
One is what you like, the other is what tag others put on you. They are orthogonal. You might as well ask "if I like red cars, why do restaurants make me wear shoes?"
So basically you seem to be saying "it's not right because not enough people do it". Is that it?
for example, given a sufficiently hot fire, almost anything can be broken down into atoms which can then be collected into single element molecules and/or simple compounds, which can then be used as raw materials. But big hot fires are not cheap to keep running... yet. I expect if/when we get inexpensive sustainable fusion reactions recycling will get a lot simpler...
he didn't say answer them, he said receive them. He in fact explicitly distinguished between receiving and responding (aka answering).
Now, would you like to answer the question?
It doesn't totally prohibit windshield mounts; it prohibits blocking line of sight out the windshield. There's a couple of spots low down near the pillars that are okay. But a dash mount or console mount is probably simpler.
Of course it's taken from others. I believe the theory is that this kind of stuff comes out of their cut of the transaction processing fee, so it's being taken from the merchant... who may be getting it back from you by charging extra for card transactions (most common with gasoline, that I've seen).
what if they don't want to, but they can't get any better offer?
"some folks who pay taxes did not wind up with lower taxes, so your statement is incorrect", more like.
do you have evidence that the number should be more than 4%?
I'm trying to figure out how you conclude that "a percentage of the profits" cannot come out to $20, and it's not working. Can you clarify your math?
so we have a lot of people commenting on it for reasons other than the actual quality of the movie.
how is this different than "bombers"?
so this prerelease movie with a reportedly "obscure" title character has 4 times the votes as the prerelease movie that's a sequel to a very very well known franchise. Somehow that seems improbable.
As I recall, the problem is that speculative execution alters the state of the CPU and its cache, and there are ways to determine information about that state afterwards that don't involve violating memory access restrictions, like "hey, loading that address didn't take as long as expected, something must've pulled it into the cache already" - that sort of thing. So the question is how much can they make the state act like the speculative execution never happened without actually reaching the point that speculative execution isn't beneficial.
To the best of my knowledge, the pollutant levels CA permits are also permitted under federal guidelines; they don't conflict.
They usually choose the number they pulled out of their ass a while back and got written into law.
I'm trying to get clarification. You said "if I cannot pay for prioritization" and I'm trying to nail down what you want to be able to prioritize - the bits coming from your ISP to yourself or the bits going from someone else's ISP to them. If you feel that the latter is so clearly not what you meant that it is silly of me to need to ask, that's fine, just say so. But I've seen more "obviously silly" interpretations turn out to be what the poster meant, so I prefer not to make assumptions.
... so my bits go faster to you than Netflix's bits, I should have said, to be clear.
so you'd be fine with me, as a streaming provider, being able to pay your ISP so my bits go faster than Netflix? If not I'm going to assume that the actual answer to the question you breezed by is "as a consumer".
and if their definition of best is simply "most linked to", what then? (This is of course theoretical; it's been a long time since that was the only criteria Google used. But it seems like a reasonable question.)
no, the point of the article is that algorithm training usually carries the implicit assumption that the data used to train is good, in all important ways, but the history of law enforcement has not always been fair, and that causes problems with the algorithm's outputs.
they figure that since a new environment requires new behaviors, it's a good time to fix some old behaviors that the environment doesn't really force change on.
the benefits of competition conflict with the benefits of the network effect. It doesn't help that the tendency for a given piece of entertainment to be on one or a limited number of services means that the services are not so much competing for the market as dividing it up.