I don't know, the aptera seats 2 (3 if one is an infant), goes 120miles on a charge and runs 30k for the electric model. The model S seats 5 (7 if you put two dead 10 year olds in the trunk), has a 300 mile range, and runs $60k. If you had to take 4 people on trips regularly, the model S is a better deal. It's also more likely to be accepted at you local country club, where people tend to have 30k+ to drop on a second car.
The Volt is dead on arrival, imho, as a real "alternative" vehicle. 40 miles on a charge? You'd think they could do better than Elon's hobby business.
George Plimpton did a nice general book on fireworks, and I think John Conklin may have something out there. Better than a general book, go to http://www.fireworksnews.com/ to find the site of American Fireworks News. Their books have all the details on fireworks - chemistry, production, history, etc.
If you really love fireworks, join the pyrotechnics guild international (www.pgi.org) and go to a convention. Just know that you'll never ooh and aah at a muni 7/4 show again.
I've been present for a 5 gallon bucket full of flash powered being ignited, about 1000-1500' away*. That's about the equivalent of a 12" salute, I believe. It was an awesome "holy shit" moment. Unfortunately, some of the crowd were not aware of that part of the display, and there were gasps and not a few people sobbing immediately thereafter, fearing that something had gone wrong. Even at that distance, the fireball warmed your face and body, and the thump was felt to your toes.
*The Pyrotechnics Guild International 1994(?) convention in Pennsylvania - all licensed and legal. It may have been a bit further, and my memory has it "just across the lake."
Their payday is in marketing dollars, and it's very real. For example - I do training exercises, and spend time with local officials - free of charge - to help them understand the technical points of building codes. I do this for local contractors and architects as well. As a result, my name is "known" locally in the industry, and when a really tough case comes up, just about everyone says "you'd better get Overzeetop to look at this one." I'm so busy - in the middle of this recession and in one of the heavily affected industries - that I'm working 60-70 hours a week (no, that doesn't include/. time).
Trust me - this is not to fill some magical well of karma. It's to make a name, and to make a name is to make money.
I'm not so sure, actually. If the defendant were not clearly guilty, the ruling might simply be overturned. In this case, with it pretty darned likely that she did do what did, the real case here is what kinds of limits should be set for recovering legal damages. Is non-commercial distribution really worth an amount equal to destroying the rest of your life? I would think that the plaintiff would need to show _actual_ damages, or be limited to a nominal fine. That is true for most litigation I'm involved in (architecture/engineering disputes). Unless you get into personal injury and pain-and-suffering cases, you've got to show actual damages and actual repair costs attributed _directly_ to the act. Consequential and incidental damages are very hard to win. Content industries insist on trying to chase the low hanging fruit (file sharers) because the law stacks the deck in their favor. If they can't provide an actual value, they get to select a prescriptive (that's not the right word...I know) value which is orders of magnitude larger than the original item.
If they can't prove the actual losses, they should get 3x the value (or 5x or 10x, not 100000x). That means finding the people who downloaded the songs and (1) determining that they did not already own that song in another form (vinyl, magnetic, CD, or commercial download) and (2) that they would have purchased the item if it were only available through a commercial site. Simple cause-effect analysis.
Which her lawyers believe is unconstitutional, hence the appeal. Making an example of one particular offender isn't the way the law is supposed to work. You transgress, you are punished appropriately. The problem is that the law, written in a different age, and with different parameters in mind, should not be applied in this fashion. Unfortunately, in this case, the defendant does not have the financial means to set this straight. The lawyers, with deep pockets and a public name to make for themselves, do have the means. There is no doubt in my mind that they are not doing this altruistically, but they happen to be fighting what many believe to be a poorly written statute and in that sense are fighting for the common good at the same time. I've got no problem with their desire to gain reputation in the process.
Nearly all pattern shells (as they are called) are symmetric about one axis, so it normally doesn't matter. Moreover, there is little spin control, so orientation is random on burst, resulting in inverted images as often as correct ones. That's why you don't see words spelled out - you can fire shells to a particular point in the sky fairly repeatably, but you can't get them to break in a known orientation. Pattern shells are, imho, a novelty. Give me a big, sky-filling willow or diadem (long charcoal/orange legs or gold/siver flitter) that stretches to the ground any day, or a volley of big, 8" salutes. I can't stand the 3-4" salutes in finales, oddly enough - they're too "sharp" a sound for my old ears - but something big that you feel in your chest, now that's a salute!
I guess I no longer have to worry about the signs in Virginia which alert me that "Speed limits enforced by aircraft." I always figured they'd just hit you with a SAM and be done with it, though I can see how this might hurt the revenue angle.:-)
It's already a moot point in humans. The environmental pressures which tend to favor many genetic advances do not exist, or rather most environmental pressures for non-optimal genetics have been removed. There are effectively no predators and we offer support (shelter, food) to those who cannot gainfully procure them due to natural inability.
You could say that there is social evolution and certain traits allow us to excel, however those traits are not necessarily useful (tall, comely) when it comes to the health and longevity of the human. In fact, those in higher social circles - often due to luck (including career choice), family, or work ethic (we'll hold that argument) - have far better healthcare than the masses and can buy their way out of a lot of problems (such as infertility).
No, for most of the first world, natural selection is no longer in effect is it was envisioned prior to the 20th century.
I just use ClamAV and tell everybody to manually scan anything they run from the outside. If they bring in a virus they pay to have it fixed or they get fired. It called personal responsibility. Of course, I only have a 4 person office and I have good backup procedures, so it's not as difficult as the initial inquiry.
And they get a $90 battery change as a bonus! Who says Jobs wasn't thinking?
(Note: I suspect there will be a couple of orders of magnitude more use of this in either testing, or in cell-phone-addict-abuse, than actual use in emergencies. Serves them right if you ask me.)
Or find him somewhere more challenging. Sometimes social skills just have to wait (it hurts to type that) - you have a kid who is out at the margins and the institutions made for most of society just can't deal with him. If you have the resources try and get him enrolled in something that's actually difficult for him. Not too difficult, of course, as by now it's the easy way or the highway. Channel whatever you can into what he likes (music) and - if you can - get some help from "experts" in the field to help put the dots together that connects music to business, or physics, or law - something salable on a larger scale than a performer.
JPL actually isn't a NASA (federal government owned) installation. It's CalTech operating for-profit as a contractor to NASA. The only actual government jobs at "JPL" are the contract administrators and some management types.
I'll chime in briefly in your favor, at least in part. When I leased a vehicle, I looked at a honda and a toyota. I liked them both. The honda was more expensive, but had better resale - the net effect was that I could lease the (more expensive) honda for less per month than the toyota. In that way, the resale issue was salient.
Now, had I bought the vehicle, I'd have gotten the toyota. I normally drive a car until it's worth very little, and the two cars appeared statistically likely to last the same amount of time for my purpose. The lease was an odd, one-off kind of situation for me, but the finances did work out.
And that's what makes it different. You're not hoarding domains (in the hundred, thousands, or more) in hopes of fleecing someone later - you bought a couple of domains you expected to use. Squatters never intend to use them, they just buy them hoping that one in a thousand becomes valuable enough to flip.
...aren't these the guys we _want_ the MPAA/RIAA to go after? These are the commercial infringers who are operating outside of the law for profit. I'll be happy to argue with you guys (i.e. - on your side) all day about personal use not being an infringing act, but this - imho - is exactly what the copyright laws are written for.
If you buy domain names on speculation, you're a cybersquatter - someone who reserves space for no reason other than to occupy the space a resell it. There is no legitimate reason to hoard domains, except to capitalize on the scarcity.
Now, since you appear to be a cybersquatter, I can see how you are a bit touchy and are looking to legitimize your business plan. That's fine. That's why houses are called "resales" and not "used." A "Domainer" (aside from sounding like something out of Waterworld) is just a nicer name for a cybersquatter - but you do the exact same thing.
Godaddy is my registrar (been there since close to the beginning and, yes, I'm just too lazy to change) and I just picked up a new domain. Checked it one week, mulled it over, then found a coupon and purchased it the next week (for about $1.40, I think). It's just three short words - long enough not to be normally squatted, but memorable for my purposes. Maybe it takes more interest for them to squat lookups?
That depends entirely on his accounting system. If he uses accrual (when he bills, it's considered income and he pays taxes on it) then yes, he's paid taxes on the uncollected sums and he may now deduct it. If he's on cash, then he only pays taxes after he actually receives payment - since he's paid no taxes he gets no deduction.
I run a consulting firm and we're cash. There are reasons to use either method, but you'd have to ask an accountant about it. Oddly enough, if I want to see how my business has run in a particular quarter, I run a report based on accrual - it represents the work we've done. Cash makes more sense from a tax position for me. I don't know if Lawyers are limited to a particular type of bookkeeping - the law generally doesn't trust them (they are the only corporations which must receive a 1099 for any income; it is not required for other corporations).
IANAA(ccountant), so this is likely a gross simplification.
But to extend your analogy, the answer is still positive. If the question is whether the answer is positive of negative, or within a certain range (as such models tend to only answer in confidence ranges), then even wrong can be right, as long as the answer is "close enough".
The question left to be answered is "how much does this change the climate modeling results?" Right now, it does not appear that the data has been entered, and the authors are only speculating that this particular change in a parameter may change the answer. Being sensational gets you a lot more press than saying you've increased the precision by another half a digit.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't know, the aptera seats 2 (3 if one is an infant), goes 120miles on a charge and runs 30k for the electric model. The model S seats 5 (7 if you put two dead 10 year olds in the trunk), has a 300 mile range, and runs $60k. If you had to take 4 people on trips regularly, the model S is a better deal. It's also more likely to be accepted at you local country club, where people tend to have 30k+ to drop on a second car.
The Volt is dead on arrival, imho, as a real "alternative" vehicle. 40 miles on a charge? You'd think they could do better than Elon's hobby business.
George Plimpton did a nice general book on fireworks, and I think John Conklin may have something out there. Better than a general book, go to http://www.fireworksnews.com/ to find the site of American Fireworks News. Their books have all the details on fireworks - chemistry, production, history, etc.
If you really love fireworks, join the pyrotechnics guild international (www.pgi.org) and go to a convention. Just know that you'll never ooh and aah at a muni 7/4 show again.
I've been present for a 5 gallon bucket full of flash powered being ignited, about 1000-1500' away*. That's about the equivalent of a 12" salute, I believe. It was an awesome "holy shit" moment. Unfortunately, some of the crowd were not aware of that part of the display, and there were gasps and not a few people sobbing immediately thereafter, fearing that something had gone wrong. Even at that distance, the fireball warmed your face and body, and the thump was felt to your toes.
*The Pyrotechnics Guild International 1994(?) convention in Pennsylvania - all licensed and legal. It may have been a bit further, and my memory has it "just across the lake."
Their payday is in marketing dollars, and it's very real. For example - I do training exercises, and spend time with local officials - free of charge - to help them understand the technical points of building codes. I do this for local contractors and architects as well. As a result, my name is "known" locally in the industry, and when a really tough case comes up, just about everyone says "you'd better get Overzeetop to look at this one." I'm so busy - in the middle of this recession and in one of the heavily affected industries - that I'm working 60-70 hours a week (no, that doesn't include /. time).
Trust me - this is not to fill some magical well of karma. It's to make a name, and to make a name is to make money.
I'm not so sure, actually. If the defendant were not clearly guilty, the ruling might simply be overturned. In this case, with it pretty darned likely that she did do what did, the real case here is what kinds of limits should be set for recovering legal damages. Is non-commercial distribution really worth an amount equal to destroying the rest of your life? I would think that the plaintiff would need to show _actual_ damages, or be limited to a nominal fine. That is true for most litigation I'm involved in (architecture/engineering disputes). Unless you get into personal injury and pain-and-suffering cases, you've got to show actual damages and actual repair costs attributed _directly_ to the act. Consequential and incidental damages are very hard to win. Content industries insist on trying to chase the low hanging fruit (file sharers) because the law stacks the deck in their favor. If they can't provide an actual value, they get to select a prescriptive (that's not the right word...I know) value which is orders of magnitude larger than the original item.
If they can't prove the actual losses, they should get 3x the value (or 5x or 10x, not 100000x). That means finding the people who downloaded the songs and (1) determining that they did not already own that song in another form (vinyl, magnetic, CD, or commercial download) and (2) that they would have purchased the item if it were only available through a commercial site. Simple cause-effect analysis.
Which her lawyers believe is unconstitutional, hence the appeal. Making an example of one particular offender isn't the way the law is supposed to work. You transgress, you are punished appropriately. The problem is that the law, written in a different age, and with different parameters in mind, should not be applied in this fashion. Unfortunately, in this case, the defendant does not have the financial means to set this straight. The lawyers, with deep pockets and a public name to make for themselves, do have the means. There is no doubt in my mind that they are not doing this altruistically, but they happen to be fighting what many believe to be a poorly written statute and in that sense are fighting for the common good at the same time. I've got no problem with their desire to gain reputation in the process.
Nearly all pattern shells (as they are called) are symmetric about one axis, so it normally doesn't matter. Moreover, there is little spin control, so orientation is random on burst, resulting in inverted images as often as correct ones. That's why you don't see words spelled out - you can fire shells to a particular point in the sky fairly repeatably, but you can't get them to break in a known orientation. Pattern shells are, imho, a novelty. Give me a big, sky-filling willow or diadem (long charcoal/orange legs or gold/siver flitter) that stretches to the ground any day, or a volley of big, 8" salutes. I can't stand the 3-4" salutes in finales, oddly enough - they're too "sharp" a sound for my old ears - but something big that you feel in your chest, now that's a salute!
I guess I no longer have to worry about the signs in Virginia which alert me that "Speed limits enforced by aircraft." I always figured they'd just hit you with a SAM and be done with it, though I can see how this might hurt the revenue angle. :-)
It's already a moot point in humans. The environmental pressures which tend to favor many genetic advances do not exist, or rather most environmental pressures for non-optimal genetics have been removed. There are effectively no predators and we offer support (shelter, food) to those who cannot gainfully procure them due to natural inability.
You could say that there is social evolution and certain traits allow us to excel, however those traits are not necessarily useful (tall, comely) when it comes to the health and longevity of the human. In fact, those in higher social circles - often due to luck (including career choice), family, or work ethic (we'll hold that argument) - have far better healthcare than the masses and can buy their way out of a lot of problems (such as infertility).
No, for most of the first world, natural selection is no longer in effect is it was envisioned prior to the 20th century.
I just use ClamAV and tell everybody to manually scan anything they run from the outside. If they bring in a virus they pay to have it fixed or they get fired. It called personal responsibility. Of course, I only have a 4 person office and I have good backup procedures, so it's not as difficult as the initial inquiry.
And they get a $90 battery change as a bonus! Who says Jobs wasn't thinking?
(Note: I suspect there will be a couple of orders of magnitude more use of this in either testing, or in cell-phone-addict-abuse, than actual use in emergencies. Serves them right if you ask me.)
Or find him somewhere more challenging. Sometimes social skills just have to wait (it hurts to type that) - you have a kid who is out at the margins and the institutions made for most of society just can't deal with him. If you have the resources try and get him enrolled in something that's actually difficult for him. Not too difficult, of course, as by now it's the easy way or the highway. Channel whatever you can into what he likes (music) and - if you can - get some help from "experts" in the field to help put the dots together that connects music to business, or physics, or law - something salable on a larger scale than a performer.
Best of luck to the GP.
JPL actually isn't a NASA (federal government owned) installation. It's CalTech operating for-profit as a contractor to NASA. The only actual government jobs at "JPL" are the contract administrators and some management types.
Well, that _is_ the proper protocol for stating the obvious. :-)
The contractor gets nothing extra; It's the architect that should get the money.
Of course, I still struggle with the concept that architects get about 6% for designing the building and real estate agents get 6% for selling it.
I'll chime in briefly in your favor, at least in part. When I leased a vehicle, I looked at a honda and a toyota. I liked them both. The honda was more expensive, but had better resale - the net effect was that I could lease the (more expensive) honda for less per month than the toyota. In that way, the resale issue was salient.
Now, had I bought the vehicle, I'd have gotten the toyota. I normally drive a car until it's worth very little, and the two cars appeared statistically likely to last the same amount of time for my purpose. The lease was an odd, one-off kind of situation for me, but the finances did work out.
"I thought I might use them but never did"
And that's what makes it different. You're not hoarding domains (in the hundred, thousands, or more) in hopes of fleecing someone later - you bought a couple of domains you expected to use. Squatters never intend to use them, they just buy them hoping that one in a thousand becomes valuable enough to flip.
...aren't these the guys we _want_ the MPAA/RIAA to go after? These are the commercial infringers who are operating outside of the law for profit. I'll be happy to argue with you guys (i.e. - on your side) all day about personal use not being an infringing act, but this - imho - is exactly what the copyright laws are written for.
If you buy domain names on speculation, you're a cybersquatter - someone who reserves space for no reason other than to occupy the space a resell it. There is no legitimate reason to hoard domains, except to capitalize on the scarcity.
Now, since you appear to be a cybersquatter, I can see how you are a bit touchy and are looking to legitimize your business plan. That's fine. That's why houses are called "resales" and not "used." A "Domainer" (aside from sounding like something out of Waterworld) is just a nicer name for a cybersquatter - but you do the exact same thing.
Really?
Godaddy is my registrar (been there since close to the beginning and, yes, I'm just too lazy to change) and I just picked up a new domain. Checked it one week, mulled it over, then found a coupon and purchased it the next week (for about $1.40, I think). It's just three short words - long enough not to be normally squatted, but memorable for my purposes. Maybe it takes more interest for them to squat lookups?
Just add a few extra zeros to the price. Five should cover it, but you might want to have that sixth zero in reserve for contingency. :-)
I knew that Apple was evil!
Combining the accuracy of the Wiimote with a gestural interface seems like a very bad idea.
That depends entirely on his accounting system. If he uses accrual (when he bills, it's considered income and he pays taxes on it) then yes, he's paid taxes on the uncollected sums and he may now deduct it. If he's on cash, then he only pays taxes after he actually receives payment - since he's paid no taxes he gets no deduction.
I run a consulting firm and we're cash. There are reasons to use either method, but you'd have to ask an accountant about it. Oddly enough, if I want to see how my business has run in a particular quarter, I run a report based on accrual - it represents the work we've done. Cash makes more sense from a tax position for me. I don't know if Lawyers are limited to a particular type of bookkeeping - the law generally doesn't trust them (they are the only corporations which must receive a 1099 for any income; it is not required for other corporations).
IANAA(ccountant), so this is likely a gross simplification.
But to extend your analogy, the answer is still positive. If the question is whether the answer is positive of negative, or within a certain range (as such models tend to only answer in confidence ranges), then even wrong can be right, as long as the answer is "close enough".
The question left to be answered is "how much does this change the climate modeling results?" Right now, it does not appear that the data has been entered, and the authors are only speculating that this particular change in a parameter may change the answer. Being sensational gets you a lot more press than saying you've increased the precision by another half a digit.