since the software for the iPhones whole purpose is based around the AT&T network, yet it does mean they do not have to support it. AT&T's network bis essentially a bog-standard GSM system. There is nothing special about it the iPhone can be "based around".
That's what Deep Cycle batteries are for. They are made to almost compleatly discharge before recharging. From the link:
"a deep-cycle battery is designed to discharge down to as much as 80% of its charge capacity"
80% is not "almost completely". Furthermore, if you actually had any experience with deep cycle batteries, you'd know that discharging past 50% drastically reduces the lifespan, and that any rational long term battery storage plan will call for enough batteries to keep the depth of discharge in the 30-50% range.
Anyway, point is on the many days when you use less than capacity and the batteries are fully charged, you are just throwing away the power when the batteries are full.
How is that "not green"? Do you need it spelled out for you? His point is that if someone is so concerned about the environment that they'd invest in all that solar, going completely off-grid is actually a step backwards because excess power can be fed back into the grid. Every excess solar generated watt that doesn't get used by some smug monied neo-enviro who's disconnected himself from the grid on principle could essentially buy off a "dirty" watt and reduce the generation of CO2, nuclear waste, or other detrimental emission by a grid power plant. Plus, the power company has to pay you for that power, and that money could go to more solar equipment, or soybean curd, or donations to dang Greenpeace, or whatever. There's nothing particularly "righteous" about disconnecting from the grid. It's just a form of lefty dick-waving: "oh yeah? I'm off the grid!" It's something done by little men with inferiority complexes, who need to feel big by physically cutting the lines, rather than just being satisfied with an electric meter that only runs backwards.
That is a logic, in the sense of a function that converts inputs to outputs in a regular way. Just not a boolean logic. No, that's not considered "logic" in the electronics world. "Logic" in the electronics sense means circuits that do useful work using two states (high/low) to represent true and false. These are considered digital systems, as opposed to analog systems, one of which is the classic coil-capacitor-diode AM radio receiver.
Actually, I personally dislike Hemingway, but he's generally recognized as a great writer. It's not so much his plots that make him so popular--his style was simply developmentally necessary to the later course of American fiction. So wait, you're saying Hemmingway technically sucked, but he can be considered to not have sucked because his development of a suck-ass, empty style was a necessary stepping stone to later works that don't suck? Personally, I think that means that Hemmingway sucked and that later writers learned from his mistakes. Hemmingway was a drunken ass who substituted vast chasms of missing detail (to be inferred by the reader, hoho!) for actual quality prose. Really, the "power" of Hemmingway is that reading his tripe you very clearly see how he was a hack writer that could have been good, but instead chose not to be.
"more people today pass on massive debt than any sort of estate."
No. No they don't. At least in the US, your heirs are not liable for your debts. Perhaps next time you rant against "the aristocracy" you might do a bit of research first. Don't be an ass. Everyone knows you can't pass on debt directly to descendants, but it's perfectly common to pass on a debt-related financial headache. Simplified example: Parent dies with $20,000 left owed on the mortgage of a house with $200,000 market value, $8,000 owed on a brand new 4-door Mercury Medicare worth $4,000--- and $200,000 in assorted credit card debt from gambling and booze. At first you think you're inheriting a windfall on the house, but after spending hours adding it all up, you find Pa was $22K in the hole. You inherited only debt. You do not inherit the liability for that debt, but you inherited only debt, just as the GP poster said. It may seem like a pedantic technical nit pick, but then again, you were the one who wanted to be a big man and berate someone on technical grounds who was merely using a generalization for purposes of making a simple point.
While the Discworld books have evolved significantly from essentially a ripoff of Douglas Adams... O please. It's the same style of dry humor, but completely different subject matter. Adopting the style alone is hardly something that can be called "ripping off". It's also particularly hard to label something a ripoff when it's several orders of magnitude funnier and better written than the supposed ripped-off source. Douglas Adams was humorous, but his writing was disjointed and bizarre, like he never quite recovered from the coke parties of the 70's.
When looking at your example we have to ask: Will most reasonable people believe that being married is good and unmarried is bad? Probably not, at least not in North America. Work on your reading comprehension. That was not the argument presented with the analogy. The question wasn't about marriage, but the implication of premarital sex. Ask around in north america, and you'll find plenty of people against it.
Hmmm, wait, something's fishy here, but I can't quite pinpoint it... It's your poor analogy. A shared printer is not a password problem but a physical access problem. The former can be fixed with a better (i.e. unique) password. The latter, only by not using it for sensitive data.
Yes, I know, It's hard being an idiot. You'll just have to deal with it.
it's considered suspicious when someone refuses to answer the door to the police. if they know you are there, they will bust down the door and drag you down to the station and eventually release you a few hours later. There is nothing you can do to stop them because in that scenario nobody is going to be on your side. That's absurd. Nobody rational would consider failing to answer the door at midnight, even for peole claiming to be police, "suspicious".
It seems pretty obvious how pay stubs could contain private information. Jeebus, RTFA. What might seem "obvious" to you based on idle speculation is no substitute for the actual facts of the case:
"there were no Social Security numbers, no dates of birth, no personal identifiers. The documents only contained name and pay information"
Until all this can be sorted out, we're posting the text of our Labor Day post minus the images in question. We maintain the city claims of confidentiality for the information posted on their website are baseless.
It does not mention if the text posted is the entirety of what was readable in the scans prior to their removal. Nice attempt at weaseling, but if you RTFA it mentions what information they contained:
"there were no Social Security numbers, no dates of birth, no personal identifiers. The documents only contained name and pay information"
Suppose someone puts up a booth on the street with Ice Cream, and little drop box with a sign that says "Please pay.25 for each ice cream bar you take". You're saying it's perfectly MORAL for you to come along and take all the ice cream (or as much as you want) and not pay him a dime because he didn't provide a means to enforce the sale? You're an idiot. You either can't construct a valid metaphor, or think we're too stupid to see through your intentionally invalid one.
At least in Spain, those zones are to be used only with the appropriate permit that indicates you work delivering stuff. For the rest of us, time limited parking meters are better. It's like that pretty much everywhere. The GP poster probably gets angry when his ticketed for parking in a loading zone, even though he doesn't drive a properly tagged/permitted commercial vehicle. I've met a number of such clueless folk.
- We only cover your car if you drive according to the law. Three years ago you were going 2mph above the speed limit, hence you invalidated your policy and we are not obliged to pay.
- Why didn't you notify me then?
- According to the policy, we're not obliged to do that either.
- Are you obliged to do anything?
- Maybe, but we're not obliged to answer that question.
Wouldn't happen that way. You can't have terms of a contract that, upon your breach of the contract, require you to continue acting as if the contract were still valid. If they continue collecting premiums after your breach, then they owe you all that money they collected on an invalid policy. Insurance isn't like credit cards. It's very heavily regulated and a company that pulls crap like that can find it self barred from conducting business in an entire state just like that.
If you reread the parent a bit, they asked if it was static -ENOUGH-, not if it was static. "static enough" is like "pregnant enough". It's either true or false, there is no matter of degree. Even if your cable IP address hasn't changed once in 7 years, it still isn't static because they can change it at will. Cable isn't static, so the answer is "no".
Shouldn't the zoom go the other way, as if you're stretching or shrinking the image?
Fingers apart is widening the rectangle of terrain being viewed, fingers together is reducing the rectangle of terrain. Exactly. The blurb indicates the opposite. Apart zooms out, together zooms in.
Moving the fingers apart to zoom out makes sense to me, you are enlarging the piece of the world/map to be displayed on the display. Enlarging a small piece of the visible map to take up more screen space is usually considered zooming in.
two fingers moving apart zooms it out; and two fingers moving together zooms it in This strikes me as counterintuitive. Perhaps actual testing proved this was the best way, but it seems to me that it's exactly backwards. If you wanted to zoom out, would it not be more logical to place two fingers on two points on the map (say) six inches apart, then have the map zoom out as you "dragged" the two points closer together, and vice-versa?
Why is it that Americans always forget that if it were not for the help from the French their little revolution in 1776 would have failed. That was pre-revolutionary france, and we were aided by the monarchy because they were at war with the english monarch and wished to encourage this "second front". The french monarchy that aided the revolting british colonists in america had its collective head cut off not long thereafter. So unless "the french" who wish to take credit consider themselves true descendents of the monarchy, they're off their rockers. The french people had no say in foreign policy in 1776. They were too busy starving and grumbling about the taxation to support the enormous war debt.
Well, I doubt many of you were ever in the Army, but I was and GI means General Infantry. Everything else you people are spouting is ignorant. Leave it to an 11-bang-bang to get it completely wrong and swear he's right. And people wonder where all the infantryman jokes come from.
GI is most commonly assumed to mean Government Issue, but even that is wrong. Around the WW2 era many military metal containers were zinc electroplated steel, also known as galvanized iron. These containers were labeled in the traditional military manner, e.g. a zinc plated steel trash barrel would be stamped "barrel, refuse, GI". Due to ignorance, the "GI" was variously assumed to mean "government issue", "general issue", "general infantry", etc. The appellation then came to be used for all things government, including soldiers. Regardless, GI still only meant Galvanized Iron.
Does that make Larry Craig a limousine liberal? Or Mark Foley? Or all the other social conservatives with mistresses, hookers, or a penchant for anonymous gay sex? Nah, they're some other type of hypocrite. There may be a name for that kind, but I can't find it. Limo Libs are specifically the types who preach asceticism in the abstract (e.g. we need to use more public transit to reduce greenhouse gas emissions) but are sybaritic in practice (e.g. take a private jet to Vegas for a night of drinking and gambling, producing more CO2 than we plebes do in a year driving to work alone). Movie stars are particularly susceptible to this type of behavior.
can Hero G.I. Joe'. It was a comic and later a toy, then a cartoon, and now a movie. Not reality. So I should feel empathy for a fictional creation? Soldiers in WW2 were referred to as "GI's". David Breger did a comic strip for the US military during World War 2, in which the main character was a "GI" named Joe. Until the action figure appeared in 1964, "GI Joe" essentially meant an everyman soldier in WW2. The article's author is using this reference. It's remarkable how the world makes more sense when you do a little research and learn a little more than just what you remember seeing on TV as a kid.
Or perhaps because we as a culture realized that if we made certain classes of citizens feel unwelcome in our military, we would:
a) Weaken the military.
b) Look like the "unfree", "antidemocratic" culture we were nominally opposing. Yeah, this theory is in the "not likely at all" category. The "GI Joe, Mk 2" creation was totally non-representative of the US military. The characters had no discipline, no uniforms in the sense of uniformity, no clearly delineated rank, and never planned anything beyond "you guys go this way, and we'll go thataway". No thinking person saw the military when they saw GI Joe the comic/cartoon. They saw the Superfriends, 80's edition.
Slashdot Mirror
"a deep-cycle battery is designed to discharge down to as much as 80% of its charge capacity"
80% is not "almost completely". Furthermore, if you actually had any experience with deep cycle batteries, you'd know that discharging past 50% drastically reduces the lifespan, and that any rational long term battery storage plan will call for enough batteries to keep the depth of discharge in the 30-50% range.
How is that "not green"? Do you need it spelled out for you? His point is that if someone is so concerned about the environment that they'd invest in all that solar, going completely off-grid is actually a step backwards because excess power can be fed back into the grid. Every excess solar generated watt that doesn't get used by some smug monied neo-enviro who's disconnected himself from the grid on principle could essentially buy off a "dirty" watt and reduce the generation of CO2, nuclear waste, or other detrimental emission by a grid power plant. Plus, the power company has to pay you for that power, and that money could go to more solar equipment, or soybean curd, or donations to dang Greenpeace, or whatever. There's nothing particularly "righteous" about disconnecting from the grid. It's just a form of lefty dick-waving: "oh yeah? I'm off the grid!" It's something done by little men with inferiority complexes, who need to feel big by physically cutting the lines, rather than just being satisfied with an electric meter that only runs backwards.
No. No they don't. At least in the US, your heirs are not liable for your debts. Perhaps next time you rant against "the aristocracy" you might do a bit of research first. Don't be an ass. Everyone knows you can't pass on debt directly to descendants, but it's perfectly common to pass on a debt-related financial headache. Simplified example: Parent dies with $20,000 left owed on the mortgage of a house with $200,000 market value, $8,000 owed on a brand new 4-door Mercury Medicare worth $4,000--- and $200,000 in assorted credit card debt from gambling and booze. At first you think you're inheriting a windfall on the house, but after spending hours adding it all up, you find Pa was $22K in the hole. You inherited only debt. You do not inherit the liability for that debt, but you inherited only debt, just as the GP poster said. It may seem like a pedantic technical nit pick, but then again, you were the one who wanted to be a big man and berate someone on technical grounds who was merely using a generalization for purposes of making a simple point.
Yes, I know, It's hard being an idiot. You'll just have to deal with it.
"there were no Social Security numbers, no dates of birth, no personal identifiers. The documents only contained name and pay information"
Until all this can be sorted out, we're posting the text of our Labor Day post minus the images in question. We maintain the city claims of confidentiality for the information posted on their website are baseless.
It does not mention if the text posted is the entirety of what was readable in the scans prior to their removal. Nice attempt at weaseling, but if you RTFA it mentions what information they contained:
"there were no Social Security numbers, no dates of birth, no personal identifiers. The documents only contained name and pay information"
BTW, ancient Hebrew has no vowels. modern Arabic still doesn't
- We only cover your car if you drive according to the law. Three years ago you were going 2mph above the speed limit, hence you invalidated your policy and we are not obliged to pay.
- Why didn't you notify me then?
- According to the policy, we're not obliged to do that either.
- Are you obliged to do anything?
- Maybe, but we're not obliged to answer that question.
Wouldn't happen that way. You can't have terms of a contract that, upon your breach of the contract, require you to continue acting as if the contract were still valid. If they continue collecting premiums after your breach, then they owe you all that money they collected on an invalid policy. Insurance isn't like credit cards. It's very heavily regulated and a company that pulls crap like that can find it self barred from conducting business in an entire state just like that.
Fingers apart is widening the rectangle of terrain being viewed, fingers together is reducing the rectangle of terrain. Exactly. The blurb indicates the opposite. Apart zooms out, together zooms in.
GI is most commonly assumed to mean Government Issue, but even that is wrong. Around the WW2 era many military metal containers were zinc electroplated steel, also known as galvanized iron. These containers were labeled in the traditional military manner, e.g. a zinc plated steel trash barrel would be stamped "barrel, refuse, GI". Due to ignorance, the "GI" was variously assumed to mean "government issue", "general issue", "general infantry", etc. The appellation then came to be used for all things government, including soldiers. Regardless, GI still only meant Galvanized Iron.
a) Weaken the military.
b) Look like the "unfree", "antidemocratic" culture we were nominally opposing.
Yeah, this theory is in the "not likely at all" category. The "GI Joe, Mk 2" creation was totally non-representative of the US military. The characters had no discipline, no uniforms in the sense of uniformity, no clearly delineated rank, and never planned anything beyond "you guys go this way, and we'll go thataway". No thinking person saw the military when they saw GI Joe the comic/cartoon. They saw the Superfriends, 80's edition.