ERIK: Save yourselves! Hy-Brasil is sinking. CITIZEN: Look, you don't know our safety regulations. KING ARNULF: It can't happen. ERIK: But it IS! Look! KING ARNULF: The important thing is not to panic.
You can do the same thing using Ruby that you can do with whichever P in LAMP you prefer (PHP, Perl, or Python)! Can we change our name to onLAM{P,R} now?
PHP: [making introductions] Ruby, Perl. Ruby, Python. PYTHON: Does your name not start with 'P'? RUBY: No, an 'R'. PYTHON: That's going to cause a bit of confusion. Mind if we add a 'P', just to keep it clear?
If you're going to sue someone you'd better be damned sure of your case before starting. No more suing McDonalds because your tea is hot.
One would think that someone with third-degree burns over 6% of one's body necessitating skin grafts, due to a cup of hot coffee, and a ten-year history of such burns and other evidence of negligence, would have been pretty sure of her case.
How does this prove anything about *harmful* radiation? Marketing departments follow every last trend, and aren't about to pass up putting a label on something giving you the impression it's better.
A really dim monitor could very accurately be labelled "low radiation".
There does not have to be a rate or frequency to be subject to radiation. If it's projecting an image, it's emitting radiation.
So does the Sun, anything with a temperature above zero Kelvin, and anything with oscillating electronic circuits. Can you cite any peer-reviewed studies or other verifiable evidence that CRTs usually emit significant harmful radiation?
The dose to a person in the United States from working on a CRT for a year is less than a few mrem, which is about 1/10 of the dose from a chest x ray, or about the
same amount you get in one day from natural radiation. http://www.hps.org/publicinformation/ate/q1046.htm l
Note to cops: If I see anyone fucking around under the hood of my car in the middle of the night, I WILL shoot first, and ask questions later, and I will be completely within my rights to do so.
Clearly this depends on your location and applicable local laws. This wouldn't be legal in my state.
Visual inspection of your vehicle for foreign objects.
Using an RF detector to locate transmissions emitting from your car.
I'm probably missing something else. These would locate the device, allowing you to remove or disable it. Of course, then you'd probably get prosecuted for interfering with a police investigation.
Remember, however insignificant 4,000 people are compared to the tsunami, they are still 4,000 people, people who had families, lives and were americans who lived, worked and touched the lives of those around them.
The same could be said for the nearly FORTY TIMES that number killed in the earthquake and tsunami. Four times *that* number die from heart disease in the USA each year alone. Lots of people die every year, every month, every day. They all "lived, worked, and touched the lives of those around them", too.
Pointing out this fact does not imply that any of those deaths was any less important or significant.
9600 baud is the limit of copper, and we haven't crossed it. The 33.6 is BPS or bits per second. Every speed increase over 9600 was obtained by compression (this is why you don't hear of a 33.6k baud modem).
Compression in the form of v.42bis or v.44 is not generally factored into the speed rating of the modem, since its effectiveness depends on the data being transmissted.
See thesetables for a better idea how these speed increases above the actual signalling rate (baud). There is a combination between faster signalling rates (note that none of these appear to have reached 9600 baud) and cramming more and more information into the signals using advanced modulation techniques.
That site displays statistics based on a preponderance of reports for each unit. A quick sampling of some devices listed as not supporting DVD+R/RW have many reports that they in fact DO support them.
That site essentially doesn't give clear, definitive evidence one way or another.
That's so far from a legitimate comparison it's not even funny. Businesses pay for electricity, to use it would be increasing their costs.
They could reduce this cost, along with the costs incurred by the restrooms, heating, and air conditioning by simply keeping the customers out.
Seriously, though, if a restaurant considers it stealing, there are options open to them. Remove or lock the power outlets from the dining room or lobby. Or post a sign stating that it's not allowed and enforce it. If they don't, it's just another aspect of the restaurant that the customer is using while they're paying for products and services.
Dear restaurant industry. Your custormer's needs are changing. Give them what they want. Tack a stupid quarter onto the bill if it makes you feel better.
This is true of more than the restaurant industry. More and more consumer-facing industries are turning on their own customers because the customers are behaving different from what they like or expect.
Some examples that jump out at me:
RIAA and MPAA suing small-time copyright infringers instead of changing their business models to cater to digerati.
Best Buy leading the way in its sector by trying to exclude the 20% of its customers that they find troublesome.
I'm sure there are some I'm forgetting, but I'm just now consuming my morning caffeine.
I and a couple other people I know can hear the horizontal sync frequency on NTSC televisions, around 15 kHz. I know that 20 kHz is often touted as a common upper-bound in young people's hearing, but I've found that most I spoke with had never heard (or perceived, perhaps a significant distinction) that sound.
Massive code changes have been neccessary as we've pretty much changed the product into an entirely different one that is now profitable with the aid of an agile process and tools + those 1500 unit tests.
I'm not disparaging XP or other agile methodologies, but I think the success of certain teams moving to agile processes is due to those teams finally building real unit tests, rather than waiting to shake out bugs during integration.
Measured on a purchasing power parity (PPP) basis, China in 2003 stood as the second-largest economy in the world after the US, although in per capita terms the country is still poor.
GDP - real growth rate:
9.1% (official data) (2004 est.)
GDP - per capita:
$5,000 (2004 est.)
GDP - real growth rate:
3.1% (2004 est.)
GDP - per capita:
$37,800 (2004 est.)
The CIA Factbook doesn't seem to have an entry for the EU as a whole, but their GDP per capita appears to be in the ballpark of $20k-$30k and growth rates appear to be in a similar area, small percentages centering around zero.
China is radically behind what we would normally refer to as the "developed world" in per capita GDP and apppears to be growing faster than our economy. That seems to fit a reasonable definition of "developing".
the Kyoto Accords which requires China to INCREASE its emmissions
Can you provide a citation to support this?
The protocol itself makes no mention of this. Developing countries are excluded from the emissions reductions targets that apply to the "Annex I" countries, but they're not required to increase their emissions--that's patently absurd. Note that China has apparently stated their intent to join Annex I soon and has been reducing their emissions anyway.
This October 2001 analysis updates and replaces an earlier NRDC report showing that China's greenhouse gas emissions fell dramatically in the late 1990s, even as the country's economy grew rapidly. The earlier report was based on U.S. government analyses, which were later questioned in a Washington Post article that prompted NRDC to redo its analysis. Even after using new, more conservative statistics, NRDC has found that the original conclusion still holds true -- China's emissions reductions are real. By comparison, U.S. emissions of carbon dioxide over the same time period actually rose about 5 percent. This demonstrates that it's possible to achieve economic growth without a corresponding jump in global warming pollution, even in developing countries.
China emits 2,893 million metric tons of CO2 per year (2.3 tons per capita). This compares to 5,410 million from the USA (20.1 tons per capita), and 3,171 million from the EU (8.5 tons per capita). China has since ratified the Kyoto Protocol, and is expected to become an Annex I country within the next decade. The US Natural Resources Defense Council, stated in June 2001 that: "By switching from coal to cleaner energy sources, initiating energy efficiency programs, and restructuring its economy, China has reduced its carbon dioxide emissions 17 percent since 1997".
China is third in emissions behind the USA and European Union, they're still a developing nation, and their still managing to lower their emissions while the USA continues to increase theirs.
Slashdot Mirror
so maybe global warming is natural, like some unpopular scientists have been saying all along!
This is insightful?
Since forest fires can be natural, that one down the street coming this way must be natural.
Riiight.
ERIK: Save yourselves! Hy-Brasil is sinking.
CITIZEN: Look, you don't know our safety regulations.
KING ARNULF: It can't happen.
ERIK: But it IS! Look!
KING ARNULF: The important thing is not to panic.
You can do the same thing using Ruby that you can do with whichever P in LAMP you prefer (PHP, Perl, or Python)! Can we change our name to onLAM{P,R} now?
PHP: [making introductions] Ruby, Perl. Ruby, Python.
PYTHON: Does your name not start with 'P'?
RUBY: No, an 'R'.
PYTHON: That's going to cause a bit of confusion. Mind if we add a 'P', just to keep it clear?
(Apologies to Python. No, the other one.)
If you're going to sue someone you'd better be damned sure of your case before starting. No more suing McDonalds because your tea is hot.
One would think that someone with third-degree burns over 6% of one's body necessitating skin grafts, due to a cup of hot coffee, and a ten-year history of such burns and other evidence of negligence, would have been pretty sure of her case.
How does this prove anything about *harmful* radiation? Marketing departments follow every last trend, and aren't about to pass up putting a label on something giving you the impression it's better.
A really dim monitor could very accurately be labelled "low radiation".
So does the Sun, anything with a temperature above zero Kelvin, and anything with oscillating electronic circuits. Can you cite any peer-reviewed studies or other verifiable evidence that CRTs usually emit significant harmful radiation?
Sure, we have herd ...
Slashdot Freudian slip.
plugging away at nefarious^H^H^H^H^Hworking very diligently on upstanding fine projects
What's "nefaworking"?
Note to cops: If I see anyone fucking around under the hood of my car in the middle of the night, I WILL shoot first, and ask questions later, and I will be completely within my rights to do so.
Clearly this depends on your location and applicable local laws. This wouldn't be legal in my state.
- Visual inspection of your vehicle for foreign objects.
- Using an RF detector to locate transmissions emitting from your car.
I'm probably missing something else. These would locate the device, allowing you to remove or disable it. Of course, then you'd probably get prosecuted for interfering with a police investigation.Remember, however insignificant 4,000 people are compared to the tsunami, they are still 4,000 people, people who had families, lives and were americans who lived, worked and touched the lives of those around them.
The same could be said for the nearly FORTY TIMES that number killed in the earthquake and tsunami. Four times *that* number die from heart disease in the USA each year alone. Lots of people die every year, every month, every day. They all "lived, worked, and touched the lives of those around them", too.
Pointing out this fact does not imply that any of those deaths was any less important or significant.
Don't forget his nose--lots of room there.
I vote that we relocate all the polar bears to Antarctica.
Particularly since it seems like a significant portion of the people I've met already believe that polar bears hunt penguins for food.
9600 baud is the limit of copper, and we haven't crossed it. The 33.6 is BPS or bits per second. Every speed increase over 9600 was obtained by compression (this is why you don't hear of a 33.6k baud modem).
Compression in the form of v.42bis or v.44 is not generally factored into the speed rating of the modem, since its effectiveness depends on the data being transmissted.
See these tables for a better idea how these speed increases above the actual signalling rate (baud). There is a combination between faster signalling rates (note that none of these appear to have reached 9600 baud) and cramming more and more information into the signals using advanced modulation techniques.
Compression is on TOP of this.
"Yeah, boss, I just subcontracted that project to some Sims..."
Sounds like a cool hack. Give the sims the ability to mess with the internals of objects around them, then see what happens over time.
That site displays statistics based on a preponderance of reports for each unit. A quick sampling of some devices listed as not supporting DVD+R/RW have many reports that they in fact DO support them.
That site essentially doesn't give clear, definitive evidence one way or another.
Many people even say 'a visa' instead of the correct singular 'a visum' (visa is also plural).
In Latin, visa is the plural of visus. I believe the English usage of visa comes from the French, who corrupted the plurality before we did.
That's so far from a legitimate comparison it's not even funny. Businesses pay for electricity, to use it would be increasing their costs.
They could reduce this cost, along with the costs incurred by the restrooms, heating, and air conditioning by simply keeping the customers out.
Seriously, though, if a restaurant considers it stealing, there are options open to them. Remove or lock the power outlets from the dining room or lobby. Or post a sign stating that it's not allowed and enforce it. If they don't, it's just another aspect of the restaurant that the customer is using while they're paying for products and services.
This is true of more than the restaurant industry. More and more consumer-facing industries are turning on their own customers because the customers are behaving different from what they like or expect.
Some examples that jump out at me:
- RIAA and MPAA suing small-time copyright infringers instead of changing their business models to cater to digerati.
- Best Buy leading the way in its sector by trying to exclude the 20% of its customers that they find troublesome.
I'm sure there are some I'm forgetting, but I'm just now consuming my morning caffeine.I and a couple other people I know can hear the horizontal sync frequency on NTSC televisions, around 15 kHz. I know that 20 kHz is often touted as a common upper-bound in young people's hearing, but I've found that most I spoke with had never heard (or perceived, perhaps a significant distinction) that sound.
Massive code changes have been neccessary as we've pretty much changed the product into an entirely different one that is now profitable with the aid of an agile process and tools + those 1500 unit tests.
I'm not disparaging XP or other agile methodologies, but I think the success of certain teams moving to agile processes is due to those teams finally building real unit tests, rather than waiting to shake out bugs during integration.
China is a developing nation in the eyes of the treaty only. They seem awfully industrialized to me (one of my definitions of a developed nation).
CIA Factbook article on China
CIA Factbook article on USA
The CIA Factbook doesn't seem to have an entry for the EU as a whole, but their GDP per capita appears to be in the ballpark of $20k-$30k and growth rates appear to be in a similar area, small percentages centering around zero.
China is radically behind what we would normally refer to as the "developed world" in per capita GDP and apppears to be growing faster than our economy. That seems to fit a reasonable definition of "developing".
Can you provide a citation to support this?
The protocol itself makes no mention of this. Developing countries are excluded from the emissions reductions targets that apply to the "Annex I" countries, but they're not required to increase their emissions--that's patently absurd. Note that China has apparently stated their intent to join Annex I soon and has been reducing their emissions anyway.
http://www.nrdc.org/globalwarming/achinagg.asp
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyoto_protocol
China is third in emissions behind the USA and European Union, they're still a developing nation, and their still managing to lower their emissions while the USA continues to increase theirs.