removing the brakes (no matter how much of a fractional amount of time) is not going to make you stop faster.
Actually, yes, it will. When your tires break traction and start skidding, you *lose* stopping power. The best braking performance comes when you are braking just short of losing traction--which is exactly what ABS does, and more accurately than a human can.
No. You wheels would've stopped turning sooner, but your car wouldn't have stopped. If you'd stood on the brake pedal with no ABS, you would've skidded further than it took you to stop with ABS. That's why ABS is there. The simple fact is, you were driving too fast for the conditions, and, on that slick snowy road, no braking system on earth could've gotten you to stop in less than 100 yards. You can't cheat physics.
This is where it usually all falls down, of course.
That's one place it all falls down. There's plenty of others.
1) The government can try to force centralization of all the information, but it won't be able to effectively process it. As I said, centralization doesn't scale. The government will drown in data and will not be able to formulate sensible policies even if it wants to.
2) The government can *try* to force centralization, but it won't succeed. People will want what they want, not what the government wants. Communist nations invariably had a thriving black market, because that's where actual work could get done. Closer to home, one only has to look at Prohibition and the drug war to see how successful the government is in enforcing its will wholesale on large slices of the economy.
the concomitant benefits of centralization.
Like most sincerely convinced communists/socialists, you have this vision that if only the *smart people* could control everything, they could make everything run great. That belief is a mirage.
Actually, a central planned economy is not a bad thing, people who argue about the "economic calculation problem", fallaciously think that a distributed network of calculators, are more efficient than a centralized clearing house.
Well, of course it is. Any computer scientist can tell you that centralizing decision making in one process doesn't scale.
'The night watchman of the future,' explains the NY Times' John Markoff, 'is 5 feet tall, weighs 300 pounds and looks a lot like R2-D2 â" without the whimsy. And will work for $6.25 an hour.'
Yes, there's open-source neural simulators for the PC out there, but the leading edge of neuronic simulation is doing it in hardware, which is thousands of times faster than modelling it in software.
On the other hand, cell phones are useless a few hours after a electrical blackout (as no one will be able to charge their phones)
Cell phones can be *immediately* useless in an electrical blackout, because cell towers are grid dependent and often do not have battery backup. Some do, and the phone companies have mobile tower units they can send out to supplement towers that are out, but still, the cell network doesn't "just work" in a blackout the way POTS does.
You're missing servers. The huge majority of Linux servers are Red Hat, because that's what the server software vendors support, and you don't run something that's not officially supported. As an additional bonus, IT departments running Red Hat on their servers will pay Red Hat for official support, so Red Hat's actually making money on all this. Almost nobody, of course, runs Ubuntu servers.
The per-unit cost of printing a book and shipping it in bulk to a distributer is a trivial portion of the price of a book.
I found one breakdown of printed book cost analysis analysis that put printing and distribution at 20% of a book's cover price, and retailer's markup at 40%. A lot of that retailer's markup is inventory cost--what it costs the retailer to store and display copies of the book. Even though the actual *printing* cost is only 10% of the book's price, you then have to pay for dealing with the physical form and getting it to the customer, which is much tougher than getting a computer file to the customer. At a guess, I'd say that 30% to 40% of the cost of a physical book is tied to paying for its physical aspects. Not so trivial.
For example, what does it mean for an experiment to be "not reproducible"? You can fail to reproduce the results of an experiment, but proving that a result is not reproducible, or somehow knowing that it isn't, is a different issue altogether.
You make absolutely no sense here. If I follow the original researcher's notes and experiment design correctly and cannot obtain his result, the experiment was not reproducible. That's what "not reproducible" *mean*--I couldn't reproduce his results.
Unfortunately, like all eminently rational disarmament plans, it ushers in utopia if everybody does it, but if only some people do it, it doesn't end well for them. Welcome to Prisoner's Dilemma land, where the operative phrase is, "You first."
Well, there's a lot of little things, but the big one would have to be that Adventists don't believe in an immortal soul. The saved will go to heaven by having their physical bodies (without which they could not exist) restored by God and then made immortal. The damned will simply cease to exist altogether.
Raising someone from birth to fill a specific job sounds like the plot to a Kurt Russell movie...
No, it sounds like the way the world used to be. It used to be the standard that you did the job your father did. In many cultures (feudal Japan leaps to mind), it was close to mandatory.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, yes, it will. When your tires break traction and start skidding, you *lose* stopping power. The best braking performance comes when you are braking just short of losing traction--which is exactly what ABS does, and more accurately than a human can.
No, *I* am Satoshi Nakamoto, and so's my wife!
No. You wheels would've stopped turning sooner, but your car wouldn't have stopped. If you'd stood on the brake pedal with no ABS, you would've skidded further than it took you to stop with ABS. That's why ABS is there. The simple fact is, you were driving too fast for the conditions, and, on that slick snowy road, no braking system on earth could've gotten you to stop in less than 100 yards. You can't cheat physics.
Stability control and anti-lock brakes are two very different things.
A newborn has a parent or guardian. He has the responsibility, and he is placed in charge of the newborn's rights (though he cannot take them away).
That's one place it all falls down. There's plenty of others.
1) The government can try to force centralization of all the information, but it won't be able to effectively process it. As I said, centralization doesn't scale. The government will drown in data and will not be able to formulate sensible policies even if it wants to.
2) The government can *try* to force centralization, but it won't succeed. People will want what they want, not what the government wants. Communist nations invariably had a thriving black market, because that's where actual work could get done. Closer to home, one only has to look at Prohibition and the drug war to see how successful the government is in enforcing its will wholesale on large slices of the economy.
Like most sincerely convinced communists/socialists, you have this vision that if only the *smart people* could control everything, they could make everything run great. That belief is a mirage.
Attitude adjustment
Well, of course it is. Any computer scientist can tell you that centralizing decision making in one process doesn't scale.
So, no changes from the present, then.
Yes, there's open-source neural simulators for the PC out there, but the leading edge of neuronic simulation is doing it in hardware, which is thousands of times faster than modelling it in software.
Cell phones can be *immediately* useless in an electrical blackout, because cell towers are grid dependent and often do not have battery backup. Some do, and the phone companies have mobile tower units they can send out to supplement towers that are out, but still, the cell network doesn't "just work" in a blackout the way POTS does.
Indeed. Most people don't realize how dangerous a dime can be in the hands of a trained terrorist.
Hail to the King, baby.
You're missing servers. The huge majority of Linux servers are Red Hat, because that's what the server software vendors support, and you don't run something that's not officially supported. As an additional bonus, IT departments running Red Hat on their servers will pay Red Hat for official support, so Red Hat's actually making money on all this. Almost nobody, of course, runs Ubuntu servers.
I found one breakdown of printed book cost analysis analysis that put printing and distribution at 20% of a book's cover price, and retailer's markup at 40%. A lot of that retailer's markup is inventory cost--what it costs the retailer to store and display copies of the book. Even though the actual *printing* cost is only 10% of the book's price, you then have to pay for dealing with the physical form and getting it to the customer, which is much tougher than getting a computer file to the customer. At a guess, I'd say that 30% to 40% of the cost of a physical book is tied to paying for its physical aspects. Not so trivial.
You make absolutely no sense here. If I follow the original researcher's notes and experiment design correctly and cannot obtain his result, the experiment was not reproducible. That's what "not reproducible" *mean*--I couldn't reproduce his results.
But don't be quick to assume it's fraud, because it's very, very easy to make a systematic error in designing an experiment.
Unfortunately, like all eminently rational disarmament plans, it ushers in utopia if everybody does it, but if only some people do it, it doesn't end well for them. Welcome to Prisoner's Dilemma land, where the operative phrase is, "You first."
What the hell does it do?
Well, there's a lot of little things, but the big one would have to be that Adventists don't believe in an immortal soul. The saved will go to heaven by having their physical bodies (without which they could not exist) restored by God and then made immortal. The damned will simply cease to exist altogether.
Neither was the compartment the guy was busted for. The police's argument seems to have been, "Well, it coulda been used for drugs."
A hunting rifle can legally have an overall length of 26 inches. Doable, I think, particularly if you're a big man. You could strap it to your back.
Well, no, it isn't. There may be regulations like that on the books, but they're not enforceable. No court in the US would uphold them.
What counter example? As you point out, after 2 AM is *after* closing. Therefore beer=good, no beer=bad.
No, it sounds like the way the world used to be. It used to be the standard that you did the job your father did. In many cultures (feudal Japan leaps to mind), it was close to mandatory.