No, tension. While the building as a whole was under compression, parts of the structure were still under tension. The failure points were in the horizontal struts - this can be seen in images of the burning towers in the form of a significant bulging around the impact site. As the struts failed, the structural outer walls bent outwards until eventually reaching the point of failure and collapsing.
Collecting rainwater is illegal in several states. The state can sell exclusive collection rights to a water utility company - they have the sole right to any water that falls on that area, and your container in the rain is stealing their water.
Because the carbon tax was politically unviable: There was too much well-funded opposition, plus it would likely drive business elsewhere. If you get taxed for pollution in one state, and don't get taxed in another, it might work out cheaper to just build your new factory in the second.
Cap-and-trade was hard enough to get legislated, and that only got through because it is much easier to dodge.
The US government takes contradictory positions on many issues - because of the way their government is structured it's quite common for federal, state and city governments to not only be working towards different ends, but actively trying to subvert one another.
Strange. It almost looks like Microsoft is only supporting technologies that require patents they own.
Re:They're missing the point...
on
How To Die On Mars
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Option one: You live a long but uneventful life in an unremarkable job. You are loved by friends and family,but after your death your memory soon begins to fade. You accomplish little of any lasting effect upon the world. Option two: You life a life of adventure and challenge, and die young in one of the many tragic accidents that your inhospitable environment causes on a regular basis. You pioneer a new way of life, and there's a good chance of your name going down in history books. You contribute to something that may change the course of history.
Either way, you end up dead - but for a lot of people, option two looks more appealing.
Machine learning is hard even when you've got good input data. The internet is full of lies.
Reminds me of the Siri clone, Isis - a program that was supposed to index knowledge, but assimilated a number of pro-life sites a bit too well. Queries about abortion or contraception were met with a long rambling monologue about sin, with a few insults thrown in against anyone who would consider such things.
Nobody outside the US in the English-speaking world takes them seriously. There are a *lot* of Creationists outside the US, including some countries where young-earth Creationism is the government-endorsed position taught in schools. You just don't hear about them because they mostly speak Arabic, and the language barrier gets in the way.
Council housing: Housing - usually very small housing - built by local government and rented at heavily subsidised rates to the low-income. The intent is to control the cost of living by bringing down house prices, thus increasing local working-class population. Council housing usually requires spending years on a waiting list, as demand is far greater than supply.
That's a lot of money to lose... I wonder if Russia has some off-the-books military project so secretive they can't even account for the money going into it.
Is there any evidence - I mean serious, well-studied, scientific evidence - that access to pornography is that harmful?
I've seen a lot of scaremongering. I've seen a lot of anecdotal accounts too, plenty of people sharing their personal stories of how porn ruined their mind and their life. But what I've not seen is serious data - the few bits of real research I've found are rather dubious in methodology, and tend to be carried out by the type of organisation with 'family' in the name that can hardly be called unbiased.
If pornography was one-tenth as harmful as anti-pornography campaigners claim, western civilisation would have collapsed by now - just about everyone has access to it and yet, somehow, the incidence of rape is actually going down. Yet the assumption remains unchallenged, because it's just too socially and politically awkward: Anyone who dares so much as suggest that maybe pornography isn't a terrible threat to children risks being branded as supporting child molestation. Society has reached the witch-hunt level: Anyone who questions the validity of the witch-hunt risks being accused of supporting the witches.
Quality and indexing. There's lots of free porn available, but it isn't very well-filed - and if you've any particular desires, you could spend far too long searching for the hot stuff and not enough time enjoying it. Some pay-porn services operate by providing access to well-indexed and often quite specialised fetishes. Even so, the porn industry online has long struggled to get customers to actually pay, and is very heavily dependent upon advertising. This creates another problem for them: Most of the major advertising companies have a 'no porn' policy, so porn site operators (Along with piracy site operators) have to go to the lower end of the market where companies are less-than-reputable.
This is why you see so many porn ads on torrent sites.
There's a reason for the bad teeth thing. Cosmetic dentistry is far more popular in the US. Most teeth naturally have a yellow tint and a few crocked angles - but in the US, any person of public prominence is expected to have that fixed for a perfect pearly-white smile. The British look bad in comparison.
A helicopter comes close. Fast, long range, VTOL capable. But they are horrifically fuel-inefficient, expensive, and the consequences of an accident are a lot worse than for a car with a correspondingly greater requirement for operator training.
It was a reference to the 9/11 conspiracy theory. The conspiracy believers claim that burning jet fuel cannot get hot enough to melt steel beams, and so it's impossible for the beams to have melted and collapsed the tower. They are simply wrong, though: As you point out, burning fuel can reach the required temperature easily, and it wouldn't even need to melt steel - just weaken it enough to collapse under tension.
When manufacturers feel obliged to design to a thinness target, sacrifices might be made. Replaceable batteries take up more space than non-replacable batteries. Besides, it's hardly in their best interest to make a machine that lasts forever.
I was designing myself a UPS controller for a lead-acid battery bank. Thanks to you, it just got an internal datalogger so you can dump voltage/current information and draw pretty graphs of power usage.
Slashdot Mirror
AC was the only way to send electricity any distance at the time. There were no DC-DC converters back then.
No, tension. While the building as a whole was under compression, parts of the structure were still under tension. The failure points were in the horizontal struts - this can be seen in images of the burning towers in the form of a significant bulging around the impact site. As the struts failed, the structural outer walls bent outwards until eventually reaching the point of failure and collapsing.
Collecting rainwater is illegal in several states. The state can sell exclusive collection rights to a water utility company - they have the sole right to any water that falls on that area, and your container in the rain is stealing their water.
Because the carbon tax was politically unviable: There was too much well-funded opposition, plus it would likely drive business elsewhere. If you get taxed for pollution in one state, and don't get taxed in another, it might work out cheaper to just build your new factory in the second.
Cap-and-trade was hard enough to get legislated, and that only got through because it is much easier to dodge.
The US government takes contradictory positions on many issues - because of the way their government is structured it's quite common for federal, state and city governments to not only be working towards different ends, but actively trying to subvert one another.
By most accounts Opus is superior - but it's also more recent, so there's a lot of content already in Vorbis format. IE supports neither.
Still no Vorbis support. Or WebM.
Strange. It almost looks like Microsoft is only supporting technologies that require patents they own.
Option one: You live a long but uneventful life in an unremarkable job. You are loved by friends and family,but after your death your memory soon begins to fade. You accomplish little of any lasting effect upon the world.
Option two: You life a life of adventure and challenge, and die young in one of the many tragic accidents that your inhospitable environment causes on a regular basis. You pioneer a new way of life, and there's a good chance of your name going down in history books. You contribute to something that may change the course of history.
Either way, you end up dead - but for a lot of people, option two looks more appealing.
One thing that Mars certainly doesn't lack is iron. Get a smelter and foundry going and you are limited only by your energy supply.
Machine learning is hard even when you've got good input data. The internet is full of lies.
Reminds me of the Siri clone, Isis - a program that was supposed to index knowledge, but assimilated a number of pro-life sites a bit too well. Queries about abortion or contraception were met with a long rambling monologue about sin, with a few insults thrown in against anyone who would consider such things.
Nobody outside the US in the English-speaking world takes them seriously. There are a *lot* of Creationists outside the US, including some countries where young-earth Creationism is the government-endorsed position taught in schools. You just don't hear about them because they mostly speak Arabic, and the language barrier gets in the way.
Council housing: Housing - usually very small housing - built by local government and rented at heavily subsidised rates to the low-income. The intent is to control the cost of living by bringing down house prices, thus increasing local working-class population. Council housing usually requires spending years on a waiting list, as demand is far greater than supply.
That's a lot of money to lose... I wonder if Russia has some off-the-books military project so secretive they can't even account for the money going into it.
Just think how many cups of tea the average Brit gets through in a day.
The word has no precise translation into American, but the closest equivalent would be 'white trash.'
Is there any evidence - I mean serious, well-studied, scientific evidence - that access to pornography is that harmful?
I've seen a lot of scaremongering. I've seen a lot of anecdotal accounts too, plenty of people sharing their personal stories of how porn ruined their mind and their life. But what I've not seen is serious data - the few bits of real research I've found are rather dubious in methodology, and tend to be carried out by the type of organisation with 'family' in the name that can hardly be called unbiased.
If pornography was one-tenth as harmful as anti-pornography campaigners claim, western civilisation would have collapsed by now - just about everyone has access to it and yet, somehow, the incidence of rape is actually going down. Yet the assumption remains unchallenged, because it's just too socially and politically awkward: Anyone who dares so much as suggest that maybe pornography isn't a terrible threat to children risks being branded as supporting child molestation. Society has reached the witch-hunt level: Anyone who questions the validity of the witch-hunt risks being accused of supporting the witches.
Would a porn identification program be a 'pornograph?'
Quality and indexing. There's lots of free porn available, but it isn't very well-filed - and if you've any particular desires, you could spend far too long searching for the hot stuff and not enough time enjoying it. Some pay-porn services operate by providing access to well-indexed and often quite specialised fetishes. Even so, the porn industry online has long struggled to get customers to actually pay, and is very heavily dependent upon advertising. This creates another problem for them: Most of the major advertising companies have a 'no porn' policy, so porn site operators (Along with piracy site operators) have to go to the lower end of the market where companies are less-than-reputable.
This is why you see so many porn ads on torrent sites.
There's a reason for the bad teeth thing. Cosmetic dentistry is far more popular in the US. Most teeth naturally have a yellow tint and a few crocked angles - but in the US, any person of public prominence is expected to have that fixed for a perfect pearly-white smile. The British look bad in comparison.
The writers were evidently aiming for just that, as another character directly referred to rose as a 'chav' at one point.
A helicopter comes close. Fast, long range, VTOL capable. But they are horrifically fuel-inefficient, expensive, and the consequences of an accident are a lot worse than for a car with a correspondingly greater requirement for operator training.
It was a reference to the 9/11 conspiracy theory. The conspiracy believers claim that burning jet fuel cannot get hot enough to melt steel beams, and so it's impossible for the beams to have melted and collapsed the tower. They are simply wrong, though: As you point out, burning fuel can reach the required temperature easily, and it wouldn't even need to melt steel - just weaken it enough to collapse under tension.
When manufacturers feel obliged to design to a thinness target, sacrifices might be made. Replaceable batteries take up more space than non-replacable batteries. Besides, it's hardly in their best interest to make a machine that lasts forever.
I was designing myself a UPS controller for a lead-acid battery bank. Thanks to you, it just got an internal datalogger so you can dump voltage/current information and draw pretty graphs of power usage.
"Thank you, google!"
- The black-hat community.