Outdoor lighting is nice to have, we're not really creatures of the dark. You could solve 90% of the light pollution issue with proper reflectors and shades though. I don't understand why people let all those lovely photons go upwards where they're not needed.
It's all relative - replace your light with a carbon-arc searchlight, the sort they used to light up bombers during the War. After a couple of weeks of that making her bedroom look like a film set, she'll be thrilled when you put the original one back.
Alternatively, put the light on a strobe circuit. Then you can claim with perfect accuracy that you have reduced the light output to half of what it was previously, and as a bonus her room will look really cool.
No, Andrew Wakefield deserves a good chunk of the blame. He has caused children to die by his self-aggrandising actions, and in a just world would be up on charges for it.
When the rocket guides itself into the ground because you put something on upside down, it's the most appropriate analogy. I've done exactly that more than once, to the point where my mental pre-launch checklist includes "navball completely blue?"
No it damn well isn't. One of the biggest cons that Christianity has pulled is pretending it owns the marriage ceremony. It's only in the last few hundred years that the Church has got involved in the marriages of normal people (as opposed to the aristocracy). Historically, marriage as a Christian ceremony is an aberration that we're in the process of moving back away from.
As someone up-thread pointed out, one reason that no protection isn't desirable is because we can lose the innovation. The bargain for patents is public disclosure of the innovation in return for protection. Without any patent protection at all, people keep things secret and if they die with enciphered diaries, we lose what they discovered. We also lose the pyramid effect where other people build on their work, which directly affects the pace of innovation.
Slashdot Mirror
"from the make-up-your-mind-son-it-is-mud-or-is-a-volcano? dept." I think we have a winner for the "most ignorant tagline" dept.
Outdoor lighting is nice to have, we're not really creatures of the dark. You could solve 90% of the light pollution issue with proper reflectors and shades though. I don't understand why people let all those lovely photons go upwards where they're not needed.
It's all relative - replace your light with a carbon-arc searchlight, the sort they used to light up bombers during the War. After a couple of weeks of that making her bedroom look like a film set, she'll be thrilled when you put the original one back. Alternatively, put the light on a strobe circuit. Then you can claim with perfect accuracy that you have reduced the light output to half of what it was previously, and as a bonus her room will look really cool.
You're obviously not an astronomer. See this photo for a good example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Light_pollution_country_versus_city.png (from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_pollution)
No, Andrew Wakefield deserves a good chunk of the blame. He has caused children to die by his self-aggrandising actions, and in a just world would be up on charges for it.
This has been done and the non-vaccinated children had very slightly higher rates of autism. http://www.jpeds.com/content/JPEDSDeStefano
At least he could spell and punctuate.
It's a text system, you wanker, not a voice system. Put your tinfoil hat back on, the Wifi is getting into your brain again.
Not if the JS was embedded in images, I believe in that case it's not interpreted but it is preserved.
When the rocket guides itself into the ground because you put something on upside down, it's the most appropriate analogy. I've done exactly that more than once, to the point where my mental pre-launch checklist includes "navball completely blue?"
Hey, give them a break! I do that in Kerbal Space Program all the time!
No it damn well isn't. One of the biggest cons that Christianity has pulled is pretending it owns the marriage ceremony. It's only in the last few hundred years that the Church has got involved in the marriages of normal people (as opposed to the aristocracy). Historically, marriage as a Christian ceremony is an aberration that we're in the process of moving back away from.
Look at it this way, it took up a slot that could have been used for another spending bill.
I'd rather they were left in place. They're effectively a time capsule, and context is very important for future study.
And if you want to reenact that for yourself, get a copy of Kerbal Space Program and get launching.
My original submission had either "vs." or "versus". Damn editors...
As someone up-thread pointed out, one reason that no protection isn't desirable is because we can lose the innovation. The bargain for patents is public disclosure of the innovation in return for protection. Without any patent protection at all, people keep things secret and if they die with enciphered diaries, we lose what they discovered. We also lose the pyramid effect where other people build on their work, which directly affects the pace of innovation.
There's a good analysis of it here: http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2013/06/23/links-23-june-the-unpredictability-of-the-law-ftc-to-probe-googles-waze-acquisition/
Yet another case of a government Missing. The. Point.
Yes, but where does the slippery slope lead to? It's an airborne camera - either you allow them or you don't.
Why shouldn't they use drones? They use surveillance helicopters. This is just another method of doing the same thing.
Nope, completely wrong. Have a look here: http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2012/04/12/the-death-of-macroeconomics-there-is-no-invisible-hand/
It might be non-surgical but a needle in the nads followed up by laser heating isn't my idea of fun.
The difference is that what you said isn't at all witty.
Would you care to define the "invisible hand" they believe in? Hint: Adam Smith only used the phrase once, and not in the context you might think.