Take two surfaces (overlapping, horizontally ) (cardboard will suffice, and place straws through them (verically)where your destinations are. Submerge it in soap/water solution. Then slowly pull it out and the surface tension will find the most efficient routes between the straws.
Yes, I'm a Qt Fanboi, but hear me out: Qt is free (LGPL), multiplatform (support all users), fill-featured and clean. QtCreator (new) is the Qt IDE, with tons of support and integrated help, including an integrated gdb (or other) debugger. If you're on Python, then wait a bit for PySide or get PyQt now.
I feel I can move mountains with just one download the sdk
Those are the stats in aggregate. I don't mean that I am still doing that ("the churn", I call it). Lately I've been more selective. After all, I'm getting older, and so my time-cost is increasing. So I have to be more selective. And, what I found with that is my ratios completely changed.
For every 1 girls I talk to, I'll get 1 number. For every 2 numbers I get, I'll get a date. For every 2 dates I get, I'll get a 2nd date. For every 2nd date I get I'll score. For every 2 I score, I'll get 1 that I'll really like.
So the updated math for the past two years is: 1 in 8... And that is much more reasonable. Though, what the stats don't show is that I'll abandon some in the middle of the process. the numbers above reflect me wanting to continue. Assuming I can cut it early on, the odd fall to 1 in 2 or 1 in 4. What I can I say, the churn isn't attractive anymore.
I work it in reverse. (And that does not mean "up the butt")
For every 3 girls I talk to, I'll get one number. For every 3 numbers I get, I'll get a date. For every 3 dates I get, I'll get a 2nd date. For every 3 2nd dates I get I'll score. For every 3 girls I score with I will continue to date. So this means I'll actually have 1 in 243 chance of meeting a girl I like beyond just sex. Given that I date about once a week (on average) that mean every 4.6 years I'll be in a relationship.
And checking my work, that works out to seem right.
I *HIGHLY* recommend the book "Mathematics and Sex" which I believe I bought because of a/. book review...
In it, it says 12 relationships is what you need to find your best match. Given 4.6 * 12, I'll be 56 before I find the one...
I've seen claims that mothers who have a Caesarean section give birth to kids who don' have the ability to handle stress. The theory goes something like: the final pains labor trigger the a release of hormones into the fetus that then give the child the ability to deal with stress. I would also assume that a woman too afraid to go natural might also have a genetic predisposition of an inability to handle stress, but that is my own conjecture.
This post will mention specific products and services, but of which I am a customer and the following is my testimony.
For my home phone: I signed up with CallCentric for free. I bought a Linksys PAP2 for $50 before shipping. (This is the VIOP box which allows me to keep my standard phone/message machine) I set it up with CallCentric and tested the service with CallCentric-assigned ph#. For $20 I ported my phone# over to CallCentric. For $3.95 a month, I get calling and $0.015 (1.5cents) per minute calling to US and Canada. The fee is a 911-recovery fee and some other fee. My phone bill is less than $5 a month.
There is no PC required, just the PAP2 and the broadband connection. I even get callerID!
This is my monthly bill:
This email is a receipt of your transaction.
Product name Period Price DID - Pay Per Minute - 14106661533 Jan 01, 2010 - Jan 31, 2010 $ 1.95 911 Cost Recovery Fee $ 1.50 Billed from Credit card: $ 0.00 Billed from Balance: $ 3.45
At some point, you're going to see a decision that that either the safety is more important, and pedos will flock to be in the TSA, or that its too vile and they'll just come up with some additional screening for kids. Given that kids are the smallest percentage, you can still clear the adults quickly, but take a hit on kids without a huge change to processing times.
Because the barriers to the government are far lower than someone of modest means.
I remember an episode of Weeds where the government finds a stolen cross by its signature (hanging parallel to the floor) in the garage of a home. While fictional, I don't think it is far from the truth. I do know that we've had satellites that can spot a single plant of MJ in a field of corn, though there is just too much data to go through (maybe with modern processing this has changed?)
But the "right to privacy" that we enjoy is something like widespread use. If every cellphone camera had a thermal imager on it, that would be "widespread". But as long as you have go out and buy these things for specific use, then they are not in widespread use. For instance I recently bought a HP3325 function generator. It was over $4000 new, but I got it for $200, many years later on a 2nd hand market. Still these devices are not in widespread use, because we have no need for them in everyday life. And we just don't have uses for thermal imagers. (I realize that I'm talking to/., so we'd be the most interested in them for fun and research, but I don't see the same level of interest across society at large) It would at best be compared to a power washer or welder. Sure, people can afford them, but few have them.
I even expect laws to be passed to protect our privacy from thermal imagers, since they are less-offensive that upskirt cellphone pics. Where the imager needs to stretch IR into the visible range, upskirt pics only need a particular angle of naturally visible matter.
There was an article that mentioned that use of these scanners violated GB laws on child porn. So now you have kids (up to 17) - very impressionable and angsty kids - that will become the target of recruitment by terrorist organizations. Epic FAIL.
What we need to do now is to accept that airline travel is not safe, and can never be safe. Everything in life that has the best rewards also has the greatest risks. Why can't we just factor risk into airline travel for the reward of being a timezone away in an hour? I would still fly. And those who wouldn't would push for a transcontinental high-speed train (Mag-Lev?) which would have a lower risk/reward, but just as cost effective.
Back college - yes, I got some, I had a 2yr intimate relationship, and she was all about exploring - anyway - in I've been with lots of women who only ever had clitoral Os. When I did the g-spot thing, they absolutely were astounded and wanted to know what I did. Several have said I gave the best O of their life. So asking women isn't asking the most authoritative person. I think what they should have done is get talented people like me (and others, because I'll be the first to admit, while talented I am *not* the best) to do our thing and have them report the difference between our clitoral stimulation and g-spot stimulation techniques. And I bet you that if full-body convulsions are any indication, they are quite different!
Yes, the above may sound boastful, particularly on/. but it is the honest truth.
Rather, put a simple thermocouple and couple transistor stages that control a heating element. When it gets down to close to freezing, the heating element activates. The current required to run the themocouple and first stage trasistor is very small. This way, you only use energy to heat when you have to.
The asteroid is traveling on a straight line. As it approaches, it changes to closing on a moving target. (the earth, who travels its diameter every 5 minutes) However the original trajectory its too fast and not aimed well for impact. So it gets close, but comes off at a new able because we to put a considerable tug on it. But its already aimed behind us, and we're moving further away.
Remember momentum is linear and the force of gravity is over r^2, so it is only briefly largely influenced. Plus, with an atmosphere we do have some kind of cushion, but it doesn't get that close. (according to the simulation)
Actually I like the idea of an ocean impact. While there is an ass-load of people along any coast, the over-all effets are minimal. Yes, immense flooding and a billion people will die. But the important thing is the atmosphere will be loaded with water and will recover in days.
Meanwhile an impact on land would send dirt particles up, blocking light for weeks or months, killing plants, freezing the entire planet. We would have a much harder time (as a planet) surviving a land impact than a water one.
I'm not sure how you would modify an ICBM to do it. The B is for 'ballistic'. and any guidance system is has would not be meant for deep space impacts. I am willing to bet that any newer or retrofitted missile could use GPS, however, once you're on the other side (above the satellites, where you have to have impact) there would be no real guidance. Also, a rocket is designed to burn fuel continuously to exhaustion. It does not have navigating thrusters for 3D movement in space.
You can increase your odds of getting an ICBM to work to be plausible, but only if you wait until too late.
You forgot Africa, which on the NASA Apophis simulation is facing the asteroid as it comes at us. However if it misses Africa, it'll end up in the Atlantic and doom the US East coast and Caribbean.
Slashdot Mirror
But the Boy Scouts date to 1913.
Where did you see this?
I won't ever buy it if I have to pay for *two* *unlimited* data plans, when I already pay for one.
And its a lot less messy.
Take two surfaces (overlapping, horizontally ) (cardboard will suffice, and place straws through them (verically)where your destinations are. Submerge it in soap/water solution. Then slowly pull it out and the surface tension will find the most efficient routes between the straws.
It was the machines! They cut the hard-line!
Yes, I'm a Qt Fanboi, but hear me out:
Qt is free (LGPL), multiplatform (support all users), fill-featured and clean.
QtCreator (new) is the Qt IDE, with tons of support and integrated help, including an integrated gdb (or other) debugger.
If you're on Python, then wait a bit for PySide or get PyQt now.
I feel I can move mountains with just one download the sdk
No because its unique. They definitely can't patent it, its not an inventions. But they can trademark it.
I see /s as ok too, but I would worry about s/, in which I would expect to see a perl-style substitution.
Prior art notice: I've been using this for years, ever since I learned in college (1994-2001) that sarcasm isn't transmitted by electrons (text).
Works just as fine for me.
Very clever comment. Particularly the last bit.
Those are the stats in aggregate. I don't mean that I am still doing that ("the churn", I call it). Lately I've been more selective. After all, I'm getting older, and so my time-cost is increasing. So I have to be more selective. And, what I found with that is my ratios completely changed.
For every 1 girls I talk to, I'll get 1 number.
For every 2 numbers I get, I'll get a date.
For every 2 dates I get, I'll get a 2nd date.
For every 2nd date I get I'll score.
For every 2 I score, I'll get 1 that I'll really like.
So the updated math for the past two years is:
1 in 8... And that is much more reasonable. Though, what the stats don't show is that I'll abandon some in the middle of the process. the numbers above reflect me wanting to continue. Assuming I can cut it early on, the odd fall to 1 in 2 or 1 in 4. What I can I say, the churn isn't attractive anymore.
I work it in reverse. (And that does not mean "up the butt")
For every 3 girls I talk to, I'll get one number.
For every 3 numbers I get, I'll get a date.
For every 3 dates I get, I'll get a 2nd date.
For every 3 2nd dates I get I'll score.
For every 3 girls I score with I will continue to date.
So this means I'll actually have 1 in 243 chance of meeting a girl I like beyond just sex.
Given that I date about once a week (on average) that mean every 4.6 years I'll be in a relationship.
And checking my work, that works out to seem right.
I *HIGHLY* recommend the book "Mathematics and Sex" which I believe I bought because of a /. book review...
In it, it says 12 relationships is what you need to find your best match. Given 4.6 * 12, I'll be 56 before I find the one...
How can junk ever be "on" a gas giant? Isn't "in" the right preposition?
I've seen claims that mothers who have a Caesarean section give birth to kids who don' have the ability to handle stress. The theory goes something like: the final pains labor trigger the a release of hormones into the fetus that then give the child the ability to deal with stress. I would also assume that a woman too afraid to go natural might also have a genetic predisposition of an inability to handle stress, but that is my own conjecture.
Unfortunately all the articles I found to link to are behind a paywall. I did however find this about a possible asthma link
Well I don't take too many inbound calls longer than a minute, but I believe it is only the outgoing calls that are billable.
This post will mention specific products and services, but of which I am a customer and the following is my testimony.
For my home phone:
I signed up with CallCentric for free.
I bought a Linksys PAP2 for $50 before shipping. (This is the VIOP box which allows me to keep my standard phone/message machine)
I set it up with CallCentric and tested the service with CallCentric-assigned ph#.
For $20 I ported my phone# over to CallCentric.
For $3.95 a month, I get calling and $0.015 (1.5cents) per minute calling to US and Canada. The fee is a 911-recovery fee and some other fee.
My phone bill is less than $5 a month.
There is no PC required, just the PAP2 and the broadband connection. I even get callerID!
This is my monthly bill:
This email is a receipt of your transaction.
Product name Period Price
DID - Pay Per Minute - 14106661533 Jan 01, 2010 - Jan 31, 2010 $ 1.95
911 Cost Recovery Fee $ 1.50
Billed from Credit card: $ 0.00
Billed from Balance: $ 3.45
That is my impression as well.
No, you can't bet on that at all.
At some point, you're going to see a decision that that either the safety is more important, and pedos will flock to be in the TSA, or that its too vile and they'll just come up with some additional screening for kids. Given that kids are the smallest percentage, you can still clear the adults quickly, but take a hit on kids without a huge change to processing times.
Because the barriers to the government are far lower than someone of modest means.
I remember an episode of Weeds where the government finds a stolen cross by its signature (hanging parallel to the floor) in the garage of a home. While fictional, I don't think it is far from the truth. I do know that we've had satellites that can spot a single plant of MJ in a field of corn, though there is just too much data to go through (maybe with modern processing this has changed?)
But the "right to privacy" that we enjoy is something like widespread use. If every cellphone camera had a thermal imager on it, that would be "widespread". But as long as you have go out and buy these things for specific use, then they are not in widespread use. For instance I recently bought a HP3325 function generator. It was over $4000 new, but I got it for $200, many years later on a 2nd hand market. Still these devices are not in widespread use, because we have no need for them in everyday life. And we just don't have uses for thermal imagers. (I realize that I'm talking to /., so we'd be the most interested in them for fun and research, but I don't see the same level of interest across society at large) It would at best be compared to a power washer or welder. Sure, people can afford them, but few have them.
I even expect laws to be passed to protect our privacy from thermal imagers, since they are less-offensive that upskirt cellphone pics. Where the imager needs to stretch IR into the visible range, upskirt pics only need a particular angle of naturally visible matter.
There was an article that mentioned that use of these scanners violated GB laws on child porn. So now you have kids (up to 17) - very impressionable and angsty kids - that will become the target of recruitment by terrorist organizations. Epic FAIL.
What we need to do now is to accept that airline travel is not safe, and can never be safe. Everything in life that has the best rewards also has the greatest risks. Why can't we just factor risk into airline travel for the reward of being a timezone away in an hour? I would still fly. And those who wouldn't would push for a transcontinental high-speed train (Mag-Lev?) which would have a lower risk/reward, but just as cost effective.
The box jelley is lethal. From 1883, when the first reported death by box jellyfish was reported in Australia, through January, 2000, 68% of individuals stung by box jellyfish died from their stings.
I'd mod you insightful.
Back college - yes, I got some, I had a 2yr intimate relationship, and she was all about exploring - anyway - in I've been with lots of women who only ever had clitoral Os. When I did the g-spot thing, they absolutely were astounded and wanted to know what I did. Several have said I gave the best O of their life. So asking women isn't asking the most authoritative person. I think what they should have done is get talented people like me (and others, because I'll be the first to admit, while talented I am *not* the best) to do our thing and have them report the difference between our clitoral stimulation and g-spot stimulation techniques. And I bet you that if full-body convulsions are any indication, they are quite different!
Yes, the above may sound boastful, particularly on /. but it is the honest truth.
Rather, put a simple thermocouple and couple transistor stages that control a heating element. When it gets down to close to freezing, the heating element activates. The current required to run the themocouple and first stage trasistor is very small. This way, you only use energy to heat when you have to.
The asteroid is traveling on a straight line. As it approaches, it changes to closing on a moving target. (the earth, who travels its diameter every 5 minutes) However the original trajectory its too fast and not aimed well for impact. So it gets close, but comes off at a new able because we to put a considerable tug on it. But its already aimed behind us, and we're moving further away.
Remember momentum is linear and the force of gravity is over r^2, so it is only briefly largely influenced. Plus, with an atmosphere we do have some kind of cushion, but it doesn't get that close. (according to the simulation)
Actually I like the idea of an ocean impact. While there is an ass-load of people along any coast, the over-all effets are minimal. Yes, immense flooding and a billion people will die. But the important thing is the atmosphere will be loaded with water and will recover in days.
Meanwhile an impact on land would send dirt particles up, blocking light for weeks or months, killing plants, freezing the entire planet. We would have a much harder time (as a planet) surviving a land impact than a water one.
I'm not sure how you would modify an ICBM to do it. The B is for 'ballistic'. and any guidance system is has would not be meant for deep space impacts. I am willing to bet that any newer or retrofitted missile could use GPS, however, once you're on the other side (above the satellites, where you have to have impact) there would be no real guidance. Also, a rocket is designed to burn fuel continuously to exhaustion. It does not have navigating thrusters for 3D movement in space.
You can increase your odds of getting an ICBM to work to be plausible, but only if you wait until too late.
You forgot Africa, which on the NASA Apophis simulation is facing the asteroid as it comes at us. However if it misses Africa, it'll end up in the Atlantic and doom the US East coast and Caribbean.