3V is quite usable though. Plenty for small lightbulbs, microchips, and low power motors. Displays might be a bit of a problem but there's a lot of flexibility.
Howe does this compare to a typical battery in terms of energy density though. 100F is huge for a capacitor but is it huge enough to replace a normal battery.
Being charged a fee makes no difference as to whether you go tot he website or not. Your computer is taxed. The tax is earmarked for the TV broadcaster.
It's not like it costs them a different amount if you do or don't watch their output. You don't get charged for that because there's no reason to charge for it. It's just a tax based crudely on the group of people most likely to benefit from the service it pays for.
No I'm proposing a different solution. I might buy some shares, and through sheer dumb luck, a rival makes a bid to control the company the following day, by offering a ridiculous price for the shares. It would be a shame to force the guy to wait to avoid paying taxes when he could make quite a legitimate and perfectly honest profit.
If you think Brits aren't thuggish you've never seen a Rugby match:)
Thing is, it is impolite. But not so much so that I think it should be a crime. Not at this level anyway. Tracking the person, yes. Tracking the car? I can live with that. Actually interfering with the car to add the tracking device - I have minor issues there.
If a random member of the public was to put a tracking device on my car, I'd be a little offended perhaps but wouldn't call the police. I wouldn't give them their tracker back either.
I just don't see this as the (literal) federal crime that people are claiming it is. It's cause for complaint to the FBI.
It's a place where he has no expectation of privacy. I'd have no problem with a member of the public putting a tracking device on a police car either. I'd actually find that sort of funny.
Why would they have got a warrant? They weren't recording anyone's conversation. Just tracking where his car went, which they could do with another car, or with some guys with cameras and notebooks. The FBI's position is that they don't need a warrant to track where a car is going.
That's not what they were doing though. I have a reasonable expectation of privacy about what I say in my car and what I do at home.
Right now, my car is quite visibly on a public street outside my house. Yesterday it was at a medical centre for several hours. A week ago it was heading up the M40 towards Coventry, and then was parked in a council car park. I have no problem with everyone knowing this.
And everyone ever charged with a crime is guilty too, right?
Not quite sure where you got this from. Or why you think that placing a tracking device on someone is somehow comparable to finding them guilty of a crime. I'm really quite lost here.
I hope you never get a chance to serve on a jury. These are the folks whose no fly lists end up getting toddlers hassled and you think they had or needed an actual reason to hassle a genuine brown person?
When I say "A reason" it doesn't automatically mean it's a good reason. Simply that they track every 20 year old community college student. They specifically chose to track this guy. We don't know why and perhaps he doesn't either, but I'll bet he has suspicions.
Their reason was that he looked like an arab aka terrorist and traveled frequently.
So you're saying he might have fitted the profile of a terrorist?
Seems sensible to check him out. He's probably okay, but really, it might make sense to just be sure about this as long as they can do it in a manner that isn't going to inconvenience the poor man.
If they had any actual evidence against him wouldn't they just come out and say it?
He's not on trial. They just had suspicion. Suspicion is caused by a whole slew of factors that can not always be easily summarised. They were collecting information to establish whether their suspicions were valid.
That's not what he's saying. The FBI don't target people without a reason. Nobody does anything without a reason.
For some reason the FBI felt he was worth following for a bit. I'm pretty certain they didn't arbitrarily pick him on a whim, or because he was a 20 year old community college student who has never done anything interesting. They had a reason. We don't know what it was.
That's all pretty awesome. Can it slow down the effective CPU speed as well? Would be interesting to see what the actual minimum requirements are for each version.
As for partition sizes, Partition Magic will do what you want. Did some pretty clever stuff with FAT partitions.
This is one of those situations where intent matters. I could quite easily set up a discussion forum on the older threads on Slashdot, taking about exactly the same stuff, but this isn't going to step Slashdot from being primarily a tech news website and that quite obviously being its intent.
If you have a site that is pretty much only about crime, and you seem to be encouraging this, then I'd say you hold some liability.
Aren't these trades working on a tiny fractional percent profit on each trade though? If so, a 0.01% transaction tax would prevent them, and the guy who sold a million dollars worth of shares for a ten thousand dollar profit would only be paying $10.
Specifically, (in the Rosa Parks case) the law was that Blacks had to sit at the back and whites at the front. There was a movable marker establishing where the sections were. The "white" section was getting too full, so the driver moved the marker further back, and Rosa Parks refused to move.
Rosa Parks was a good public face for the campaign. A Well spoken respectable middle aged woman was simply better for convincing the public than a pregnant 15 year old with a tendency towards profanity.
Here's the thing - if you're flying an attack helicopter, part of your job is to kill human beings. For the sake of your own humanity, you're forced to dehumanise them.
Anyway, banter is just that - banter. Talk to anyone who deals with death on a regular basis. They'll have a pretty dark sense of humour. It's a shield. This does not mean they're not being professional. The crew knew that there was a risk that they were attacking civilians. This is why there are procedures in place. But the procedures just reduce the risk. They don't eliminate it
War is still a dangerous place. It's tragic but mistakes happen. They happen a lot. That's not the crime here. The crime is that this was covered up.
Others disagree with this view. They consider that if the public knows exactly what's said, then a frank exchange of views is not possible.
It may be misclassified, but no law is broken misclassifying it in this way. It's simply not likely to cause enough damage if this is done, and easily reversible in the rare case that it does some sort of harm.
Well, it was a little confusing (illustrated by the fact that at least 3 people were confused) that you mention Blade Runner being a so-so book, then mentioned that he has written tons of great science fiction, then listing a list of book, which presumably you consider to be part of that "tons".
Hey, people aren't getting at you. Just remember that other people may interpret things differently from how you intended.
The IIPA doesn't give a damn about Chile, India or any of them except possibly China, Spain and Canada. Sure, they'd like the other countries to do something but it's more about shaming those three by being on the same list as a bunch of countries that everyone *knows* are terrible offenders.
Slashdot Mirror
3V is quite usable though. Plenty for small lightbulbs, microchips, and low power motors. Displays might be a bit of a problem but there's a lot of flexibility.
Howe does this compare to a typical battery in terms of energy density though. 100F is huge for a capacitor but is it huge enough to replace a normal battery.
No. It's just that they're going to behave in a manner consistent with this position. They don't see it as any different from a stakeout.
Other people see things differently.
Being charged a fee makes no difference as to whether you go tot he website or not. Your computer is taxed. The tax is earmarked for the TV broadcaster.
It's not like it costs them a different amount if you do or don't watch their output. You don't get charged for that because there's no reason to charge for it. It's just a tax based crudely on the group of people most likely to benefit from the service it pays for.
Been years since I bought a blank CD or DVD. I have about 30 DVDs left. At current burn rate this will last me a couple of years.
Unless this is really atypical behaviour, they're not getting a lot of money from blank discs.
These days, special effects mean that even death isn't an impediment.
No I'm proposing a different solution. I might buy some shares, and through sheer dumb luck, a rival makes a bid to control the company the following day, by offering a ridiculous price for the shares. It would be a shame to force the guy to wait to avoid paying taxes when he could make quite a legitimate and perfectly honest profit.
If you think Brits aren't thuggish you've never seen a Rugby match:)
Thing is, it is impolite. But not so much so that I think it should be a crime. Not at this level anyway. Tracking the person, yes. Tracking the car? I can live with that. Actually interfering with the car to add the tracking device - I have minor issues there.
If a random member of the public was to put a tracking device on my car, I'd be a little offended perhaps but wouldn't call the police. I wouldn't give them their tracker back either.
I just don't see this as the (literal) federal crime that people are claiming it is. It's cause for complaint to the FBI.
It's a place where he has no expectation of privacy. I'd have no problem with a member of the public putting a tracking device on a police car either. I'd actually find that sort of funny.
Others disagree.
Clearly:)
Fair point:)
Why would they have got a warrant? They weren't recording anyone's conversation. Just tracking where his car went, which they could do with another car, or with some guys with cameras and notebooks. The FBI's position is that they don't need a warrant to track where a car is going.
That's not what they were doing though. I have a reasonable expectation of privacy about what I say in my car and what I do at home.
Right now, my car is quite visibly on a public street outside my house. Yesterday it was at a medical centre for several hours. A week ago it was heading up the M40 towards Coventry, and then was parked in a council car park. I have no problem with everyone knowing this.
That is more than just an "inconvenience".
How so?
Did it prevent him from going anywhere or from doing anything? Is it going to prevent him from getting a job? Delay him from an important meeting?
His car - a piece of his property that was usually in a location where it could be seen by anyone - was being tracked.
And everyone ever charged with a crime is guilty too, right?
Not quite sure where you got this from. Or why you think that placing a tracking device on someone is somehow comparable to finding them guilty of a crime. I'm really quite lost here.
I hope you never get a chance to serve on a jury. These are the folks whose no fly lists end up getting toddlers hassled and you think they had or needed an actual reason to hassle a genuine brown person?
When I say "A reason" it doesn't automatically mean it's a good reason. Simply that they track every 20 year old community college student. They specifically chose to track this guy. We don't know why and perhaps he doesn't either, but I'll bet he has suspicions.
Their reason was that he looked like an arab aka terrorist and traveled frequently.
So you're saying he might have fitted the profile of a terrorist?
Seems sensible to check him out. He's probably okay, but really, it might make sense to just be sure about this as long as they can do it in a manner that isn't going to inconvenience the poor man.
If they had any actual evidence against him wouldn't they just come out and say it?
He's not on trial. They just had suspicion. Suspicion is caused by a whole slew of factors that can not always be easily summarised. They were collecting information to establish whether their suspicions were valid.
Too bad you could not get it onto a plane
I'm not sure you couldn't. It doesn't contain any sharp edges.
That's not what he's saying. The FBI don't target people without a reason. Nobody does anything without a reason.
For some reason the FBI felt he was worth following for a bit. I'm pretty certain they didn't arbitrarily pick him on a whim, or because he was a 20 year old community college student who has never done anything interesting. They had a reason. We don't know what it was.
That's all pretty awesome. Can it slow down the effective CPU speed as well? Would be interesting to see what the actual minimum requirements are for each version.
As for partition sizes, Partition Magic will do what you want. Did some pretty clever stuff with FAT partitions.
Yup.
This is one of those situations where intent matters. I could quite easily set up a discussion forum on the older threads on Slashdot, taking about exactly the same stuff, but this isn't going to step Slashdot from being primarily a tech news website and that quite obviously being its intent.
If you have a site that is pretty much only about crime, and you seem to be encouraging this, then I'd say you hold some liability.
Aren't these trades working on a tiny fractional percent profit on each trade though? If so, a 0.01% transaction tax would prevent them, and the guy who sold a million dollars worth of shares for a ten thousand dollar profit would only be paying $10.
Specifically, (in the Rosa Parks case) the law was that Blacks had to sit at the back and whites at the front. There was a movable marker establishing where the sections were. The "white" section was getting too full, so the driver moved the marker further back, and Rosa Parks refused to move.
Rosa Parks was a good public face for the campaign. A Well spoken respectable middle aged woman was simply better for convincing the public than a pregnant 15 year old with a tendency towards profanity.
Here's the thing - if you're flying an attack helicopter, part of your job is to kill human beings. For the sake of your own humanity, you're forced to dehumanise them.
Anyway, banter is just that - banter. Talk to anyone who deals with death on a regular basis. They'll have a pretty dark sense of humour. It's a shield. This does not mean they're not being professional. The crew knew that there was a risk that they were attacking civilians. This is why there are procedures in place. But the procedures just reduce the risk. They don't eliminate it
War is still a dangerous place. It's tragic but mistakes happen. They happen a lot. That's not the crime here. The crime is that this was covered up.
Others disagree with this view. They consider that if the public knows exactly what's said, then a frank exchange of views is not possible.
It may be misclassified, but no law is broken misclassifying it in this way. It's simply not likely to cause enough damage if this is done, and easily reversible in the rare case that it does some sort of harm.
Well, it was a little confusing (illustrated by the fact that at least 3 people were confused) that you mention Blade Runner being a so-so book, then mentioned that he has written tons of great science fiction, then listing a list of book, which presumably you consider to be part of that "tons".
Hey, people aren't getting at you. Just remember that other people may interpret things differently from how you intended.
It makes no difference.
The Wicker Man remake isn't endlessly mocked because hardly anyone saw it and most people don't remember it. It was simply unremarkable.
If these films are poor then we'll do the same. It isn't going to have an effect on the original
The IIPA doesn't give a damn about Chile, India or any of them except possibly China, Spain and Canada. Sure, they'd like the other countries to do something but it's more about shaming those three by being on the same list as a bunch of countries that everyone *knows* are terrible offenders.