US has been known to shut down gps over regions during conflicts, last happend to india in 1999. India like eu, china, and russia now want thier own systems so they are not dependent on the USs goodwill and support.
I expect at least GLONASS is also designed to be able to spoof GPS.
It would have come anyway, but possibly slower. There's also been the fappening, the Snappening, major store chains hit by hackers that stole credit card info... People are starting to wake up the reality of the digital age, and this is it: unencrypted data is not secure against bad actors who will use it against you. Encrypted data MIGHT be secure. At least it's better than unencrypted data.
Step 1: research on the ISS focused on biosphere components and food production. Step 2: build a new station to experiment on establishing a small biosphere Step 3: Expand it to the point that it's food and air sufficient for humans Step 4: Build a moon base and apply what you learned in LEO to make it self-sufficient
At the same time, work on high efficiency, low reaction mass propulsion systems. This is the real killer. If you can't crack the problem of long distance propulsion systems, we're stuck near earth where we can or make fuel.
What did they imagine the White House Press Office was for? It's always been the tool that the White House uses to get whatever information it wants the press to report on out to reporters. It's not a service to the press to tell them everything THEY want to know about the government. Never has been. If they're not getting out the information that THEY want to report on, whose job is that?
Backward compatibility isn't just important, it's paramount. It's not 1957.
Nobody wants to upgrade their build system to a newer version of the language and find out it breaks the code all over the place. Nobody has time for that. New versions of the same language need to ONLY (1) fix errors (2) add new features that you invoke with new code that would be rejected by the old version's parser. If you change how old code will behave, that's not a new version. It's a new language.
Likewise other systems, such as operating systems and even user-exposed interfaces, because ultimately programs depend on them working a certain way.
If you believe there's a god, you're not atheist, and believing in the divinity of Christ is not an essential belief of Christianity. It has been mainstream dogma for a long time, but it was a matter of debate and division in the Christian church from the earliest days. As for God being personally knowable, that's a modern Protestant idea (that has now bled into some traditional faiths). The vast majority of Christians over Christian history wouldn't have said that God was "personally knowable" for people like them. For people of traditional faiths, the relationship of God to Christian was that of (gracious but stern) king to subject.
I think this is why they identified "goes to church regularly" as opposed to "is a Christian."
The former is therefore more likely to be correlated with behavior than the latter. All the same, some religions have much higher divorce rates than others.
There are atheists, who don't go to church regularly because for them it's no a thing to do, and they don't get divorced much more or less than others.
There are religious people that also don't go to church much and they apparently get divorced a lot more than those that do go to church.
There are religious people that do go to church regularly and they get divorced less than those that don't go to church much.
Also wealthier people simply have more resources to deal with financial trouble. They're not as likely to be split by external financial pressures, able to afford marriage counseling, possibly less likely to have been financially pressured into selecting a poor match and less likely to be looking to upgrade to a wealthier partner.
Your attitude toward your partner (Men are 1.5x more likely to end up divorced when they care more about their partner's looks, and women are 1.6x more likely to end up divorced when they care more about their partner's wealth.)
What about men caring for their wife wealth and women caring for their husband looks ? What about homosexual couple ? Also a lot of the reason given seems to boild down to the following :
* if you know somebody for a long time before getting married your marriage is more stable (less bad surprise)
* if you or your spouse has a lot of wealth invested either in the ceremony or yourself, you are less likely to "split" away and lose wealth
Not necessarily sexist. Maybe they asked both sexes the same questions and they found that the there was no significant correlation with whether women cared about men's looks or whether men cared about women's wealth.
I'm more interested in the "churchgoing" thing. It flies in the face of studies that show atheists don't have very different odds of getting divorced, whereas conservative Christians have higher divorce rates. Maybe the actual atheists are buried in a larger population of people that are nominally religious but don't go to church. I can see how the latter might be an interesting subgroup of religious people. These are people that think something is important but don't do it anyway. Atheists might be a lot more like the unfiltered population of religious people in that they are neither more nor less likely to do things they regard as important.
I've observed that a similar dynamic applies to men. Most will ignore a smart, resourceful and mentally stable woman if she only has average looks in favor of a woman that's feckless and irrational if the latter happens to be pretty. (Even if the former is obviously interested in him and the latter manifestly isn't.)
Both are equally capable of having babies (the biological reason you're interested). The former is going to be a lot more enjoyable to be with over the long haul.
I'd be interested in seeing whether the oxytocin thing works the same in male mice and male and female humans.
It's not just the maximum speed you need to account for but also the cochannel interference, dropped packets and retransmits. You can't maintain high bit rates while other devices are using the same wireless channel at the same time. the degradation you have experienced is probably due to your having more devices on your wireless LAN and your neighbors installing wireless LANs on the same radio frequencies.
"Human flesh search" is a method of identifying what/who/what place is in a picture by posting it widely on the internet and encouraging people to tell you what/who/where it is.
There's nothing wrong with that aspect of it and that's not what China is trying to ban. They're trying to ban the use of it to harm and harass people (including government officials). Notable instances of it include people who were driven to suicide because they could not stand the harassment.
Amazon will likely have a team to "pick" the winner and there will be a lawyer on the team whose job it is to make sure Amazon ends up holding the patents.
The only thing I question about it is whether the 5 year time horizon is the most relevant. There's a lot of uncertainty about whether the automation will still be relevant and useful in 5 years. What if you or your business has moved on? What if the whole job has been automated in some higher level way so that task isn't done any more?
Slashdot Mirror
US has been known to shut down gps over regions during conflicts, last happend to india in 1999. India like eu, china, and russia now want thier own systems so they are not dependent on the USs goodwill and support.
I expect at least GLONASS is also designed to be able to spoof GPS.
The moon has problems for supporting an ecosystem. Those 354 hour nights are a bitch. That's why an orbital research lab is necessary first.
It would have come anyway, but possibly slower. There's also been the fappening, the Snappening, major store chains hit by hackers that stole credit card info... People are starting to wake up the reality of the digital age, and this is it: unencrypted data is not secure against bad actors who will use it against you. Encrypted data MIGHT be secure. At least it's better than unencrypted data.
Step 1: research on the ISS focused on biosphere components and food production.
Step 2: build a new station to experiment on establishing a small biosphere
Step 3: Expand it to the point that it's food and air sufficient for humans
Step 4: Build a moon base and apply what you learned in LEO to make it self-sufficient
At the same time, work on high efficiency, low reaction mass propulsion systems. This is the real killer. If you can't crack the problem of long distance propulsion systems, we're stuck near earth where we can or make fuel.
What did they imagine the White House Press Office was for? It's always been the tool that the White House uses to get whatever information it wants the press to report on out to reporters. It's not a service to the press to tell them everything THEY want to know about the government. Never has been. If they're not getting out the information that THEY want to report on, whose job is that?
Being up north, I'm hoping you'll give us advance warning when Hel freezes over.
Wait a minute -- isn't Nordic Hel already frozen over?
Rated funny? I would have given it +1 Sad if that were an option.
That doesn't follow from what I wrote.
Backward compatibility isn't just important, it's paramount. It's not 1957.
Nobody wants to upgrade their build system to a newer version of the language and find out it breaks the code all over the place. Nobody has time for that. New versions of the same language need to ONLY
(1) fix errors
(2) add new features that you invoke with new code that would be rejected by the old version's parser.
If you change how old code will behave, that's not a new version. It's a new language.
Likewise other systems, such as operating systems and even user-exposed interfaces, because ultimately programs depend on them working a certain way.
If you believe there's a god, you're not atheist, and believing in the divinity of Christ is not an essential belief of Christianity. It has been mainstream dogma for a long time, but it was a matter of debate and division in the Christian church from the earliest days. As for God being personally knowable, that's a modern Protestant idea (that has now bled into some traditional faiths). The vast majority of Christians over Christian history wouldn't have said that God was "personally knowable" for people like them. For people of traditional faiths, the relationship of God to Christian was that of (gracious but stern) king to subject.
I think this is why they identified "goes to church regularly" as opposed to "is a Christian."
The former is therefore more likely to be correlated with behavior than the latter. All the same, some religions have much higher divorce rates than others.
There are atheists, who don't go to church regularly because for them it's no a thing to do, and they don't get divorced much more or less than others.
There are religious people that also don't go to church much and they apparently get divorced a lot more than those that do go to church.
There are religious people that do go to church regularly and they get divorced less than those that don't go to church much.
There's no evidence of that in the bible. The prostitute named Mary seems to be a different person.
I'm guessing they controlled for other factors in making each determination.
Not supported by the observations. Wealthier people are LESS likely to divorce.
Also wealthier people simply have more resources to deal with financial trouble. They're not as likely to be split by external financial pressures, able to afford marriage counseling, possibly less likely to have been financially pressured into selecting a poor match and less likely to be looking to upgrade to a wealthier partner.
What about men caring for their wife wealth and women caring for their husband looks ? What about homosexual couple ? Also a lot of the reason given seems to boild down to the following :
* if you know somebody for a long time before getting married your marriage is more stable (less bad surprise)
* if you or your spouse has a lot of wealth invested either in the ceremony or yourself, you are less likely to "split" away and lose wealth
Not necessarily sexist. Maybe they asked both sexes the same questions and they found that the there was no significant correlation with whether women cared about men's looks or whether men cared about women's wealth.
I'm more interested in the "churchgoing" thing. It flies in the face of studies that show atheists don't have very different odds of getting divorced, whereas conservative Christians have higher divorce rates. Maybe the actual atheists are buried in a larger population of people that are nominally religious but don't go to church. I can see how the latter might be an interesting subgroup of religious people. These are people that think something is important but don't do it anyway. Atheists might be a lot more like the unfiltered population of religious people in that they are neither more nor less likely to do things they regard as important.
I've observed that a similar dynamic applies to men. Most will ignore a smart, resourceful and mentally stable woman if she only has average looks in favor of a woman that's feckless and irrational if the latter happens to be pretty. (Even if the former is obviously interested in him and the latter manifestly isn't.)
Both are equally capable of having babies (the biological reason you're interested). The former is going to be a lot more enjoyable to be with over the long haul.
I'd be interested in seeing whether the oxytocin thing works the same in male mice and male and female humans.
It's not just the maximum speed you need to account for but also the cochannel interference, dropped packets and retransmits. You can't maintain high bit rates while other devices are using the same wireless channel at the same time. the degradation you have experienced is probably due to your having more devices on your wireless LAN and your neighbors installing wireless LANs on the same radio frequencies.
There's still the reliability issue. Show that some patient won't die because of RFI and we're good.
That does seem to be the minimum entropy quantum state.
Someone else's. You need to ingest capsules that have only the non-disease-causing bacteria.
"Human flesh search" is a method of identifying what/who/what place is in a picture by posting it widely on the internet and encouraging people to tell you what/who/where it is.
There's nothing wrong with that aspect of it and that's not what China is trying to ban. They're trying to ban the use of it to harm and harass people (including government officials). Notable instances of it include people who were driven to suicide because they could not stand the harassment.
Amazon will likely have a team to "pick" the winner and there will be a lawyer on the team whose job it is to make sure Amazon ends up holding the patents.
The only thing I question about it is whether the 5 year time horizon is the most relevant. There's a lot of uncertainty about whether the automation will still be relevant and useful in 5 years. What if you or your business has moved on? What if the whole job has been automated in some higher level way so that task isn't done any more?
If you think you don't have time to automate more jobs, but spend most of your time fixing problems caused by lack of automation, you are mistaken.
But it may not be in your interest to automate the remainder of what could be automated, because then what would happen to your job?