plus I don't think man made diamonds are ever going to eclipse natural ones for jewelry, there is just no cache (can't be bothered to find the accented e at the end of that word) attached to them.
It's "cachet", no accent.
If you think manmade diamonds won't be as popular as natural ones, look at cultured pearls. There's very little cachet to naturally occurring pearls.
I think it's because that's where the subs are. This page lists lots of launches there, most of which were apparently done purely to destroy the missiles.
You seem to have forgotten that countries can withdraw from the treaty with 3 months notice, as North Korea did. Signing it isn't an unchangeable commitment.
if the missile decides to blow up, would you rather have it over land or over sea?
I'd like it to be over an uninhabited area, obviously. But the submarine presumably has a crew who aren't going to be in a bunker watching from a distance, and submarines are pretty expensive things to sit under a potential bomb.
and there's also the fact that they can load it onto the sub wherever they want and then just move it to where they want to launch it.
That would be a benefit if the Barents Sea was a particularly good place to launch from, but I don't see anything other than its isolation -- and Russia has access to lots of isolated places on land, further south where launching is easier because you've got a higher starting velocity.
I RTFA'd, and didn't see the answer to this question: why launch from a submarine? Presumably all these old submarine-launched missiles would be less trouble to launch from land. What's the advantage of doing it at sea?
I think you need to look at more countries than just the USA and China if you want to start drawing conclusions about relations between capital punishment and deterrence.
For example, look at the analysis at the bottom of the page:
"For every 100,000 people in the U.S., 726 are imprisoned, compared to figures of 142 per 100,000 for England, 91 for France, and 58 for Japan. Almost 13 percent of black males in their late 20s are in prison or jail, while for Hispanics the corresponding figure is 3.6 percent. Only 1.7 percent of white twentysomething males are incarcerated.
While the violent crime rate in the U.S. dropped by one-third from 1994 to 2003, and the property crime rate by 23 percent, the prison population has increased by an annual average of 3.5 percent since 1995. Much of the increase is due to convicts reoffending; two out of every three prisoners released return to prison within three years."
The land of the free just stands way out from every other large country in its rate of imprisonment of its citizens.
Actually the US produces closer to 29-30% of the world's goods with 25% of the world's "resources". So, we produce goods at a higher efficiency than the rest of the world (on average).
What is your source for those numbers? I don't doubt them (much; nationmaster.com says the US produces 23% of the world's GDP, but they can't even spell their own name right on their home page), but I'd like to look up how China compares. My guess would be that its ratio of goods produced per resources used would be a lot higher than the American ratio of 1.2.
The disadvantage of the filesystem back end is the proliferation of files. You get a new file with every commit. You need to be careful that your file system works well with a directory that might contain tens of thousands of files.
But you shouldn't lose a repository if bdb corrupts -- you should just lose the commits since the last backup. If you're running without backups, then you'd better watch out for hardware failures, system theft, fires, floods, etc.
Why do you find this scary? I think it's tremendous news that I'll have a petabyte (one million gigabytes) in my DVR in a couple of years. So what that those Dutch guys will have to pay $4,300,000 for one? I don't live there.
Or maybe the Register got some of the details wrong in this article...
I think it's safe to say comments are for the benefit of those who have not assimilated their language, their APIs, etc.
When you write something, are you sure that only someone who knows as much as you about the problem is going to look at it?
I've been programming for longer than you have, and I know that [me next year] is going to benefit from comments that [me now] puts in my code, because [me now] knows the context of the problem, and [me next year] will have forgotten a lot of it. [Me now] may have learned some horrible API in order to write the code, and [me next year] won't have used it for a year.
And if someone else is looking at my code next year, they'll likely know even less than [me next year].
Comments, at ***BEST***, tell you what the author of the comment *hopes* was going on, at the time it was written. The code that follows may well not do anything of the sort; it may have, at one point, only to have been re-written by somebody else at a later date; it may still do what was stated, though that's no longer what's needed.
Code can have bugs and it doesn't always do what was intended. Sometimes comments have errors too.
We don't throw up our hands and say "never write code, it might not be perfect", so why do that over incorrect comments?
Learn to do your job right. Don't depend on what was written in any comments. The compiler ignores comments; so should you.
As your own experience showed you, sometimes what was written in the code can't be depended on either. Compilers can have bugs too.
I don't need to go to a US bank, I can see a picture here. I agree they're the nicest looking US bills, but I think being the best looking US banknote still doesn't put it in the same league as most other countries' currency.
They are still available because they never make it to the Federal Reserve banks. The FR banks scan incoming currency for wear or age and remove offending bills from circulation, replacing the bills with newly printed bills to equal the quantity of removed currency.
The Canadian system is the same. But the US printed 100 million $2 bills last year, the first printing in the 2000's. (By comparison, they print several billion 1's every year. The print run of the $2's is by far the smallest of any denomination still being printed.)
Are the $2's printed entirely for novelty value? That makes no sense for a banknote that is so easy to forge.
Okay, this makes no sense. $2 bills are legal tender, fine. But why are they still available? What use is it to have bills circulating when lots of vendors have never seen them, and won't be able to recognize the difference between real ones and ones you printed up on your inkjet printer?
In Canada, $1 and $2 bills are still legal tender, but you almost never see them, because they were withdrawn from circulation when the coins were introduced. But in the USA, they're still printing $2's, but hardly any of them compared to other denominations.
Not entirely true. You must accept it for DEBTS. You do not have to accept it for products and services yet to be rendered. In this case, they are not obligated to accept it.
This was a case where the customer had something installed, and after the fact Best Buy decided to charge him for installation. It was a debt.
So, look at this. I am being materially negatively impacted by a company whose products I don't even buy. How, exactly, is the invisible hand of the market going to help with this?
You need to use a visible hand to get the invisible hand to work. Put together and win a class action suit, cost them lots of money. Then the price of Windows will go up, and fewer people will use it.
No, they don't need the support of the other parties. The Prime Minister would tell the Governor-General that he wished to dissolve the government. The G-G would ask the opposition if they could form a government instead. Since there's no way the other parties could form a stable government, an election would be called.
Also, if you have cached a copy of the web page (say in your individual browser cache, or if your company has a caching proxy server), there is arguably a duty to preserve that cached copy.
This doesn't sound very practical to me. The people who know what's in the cache won't know which items in it are mentioned in email messages like this one: "Hey, you see what Enron did in that story on news.com.com today? We did the same thing!" So should they back up everything in the whole cache?
Slashdot Mirror
plus I don't think man made diamonds are ever going to eclipse natural ones for jewelry, there is just no cache (can't be bothered to find the accented e at the end of that word) attached to them.
It's "cachet", no accent.
If you think manmade diamonds won't be as popular as natural ones, look at cultured pearls. There's very little cachet to naturally occurring pearls.
I think it's because that's where the subs are. This page lists lots of launches there, most of which were apparently done purely to destroy the missiles.
The closer to the equator you are, the easier it is to reach orbit.
Wow, I guess you didn't RTFA. This launch will take place in the Barents Sea, not very close to the equator at all.
You seem to have forgotten that countries can withdraw from the treaty with 3 months notice, as North Korea did. Signing it isn't an unchangeable commitment.
Thanks, those are all good points.
if the missile decides to blow up, would you rather have it over land or over sea?
I'd like it to be over an uninhabited area, obviously. But the submarine presumably has a crew who aren't going to be in a bunker watching from a distance, and submarines are pretty expensive things to sit under a potential bomb.
and there's also the fact that they can load it onto the sub wherever they want and then just move it to where they want to launch it.
That would be a benefit if the Barents Sea was a particularly good place to launch from, but I don't see anything other than its isolation -- and Russia has access to lots of isolated places on land, further south where launching is easier because you've got a higher starting velocity.
I RTFA'd, and didn't see the answer to this question: why launch from a submarine? Presumably all these old submarine-launched missiles would be less trouble to launch from land. What's the advantage of doing it at sea?
I think you need to look at more countries than just the USA and China if you want to start drawing conclusions about relations between capital punishment and deterrence.
For example, look at the analysis at the bottom of the page:
"For every 100,000 people in the U.S., 726 are imprisoned, compared to figures of 142 per 100,000 for England, 91 for France, and 58 for Japan. Almost 13 percent of black males in their late 20s are in prison or jail, while for Hispanics the corresponding figure is 3.6 percent. Only 1.7 percent of white twentysomething males are incarcerated.
While the violent crime rate in the U.S. dropped by one-third from 1994 to 2003, and the property crime rate by 23 percent, the prison population has increased by an annual average of 3.5 percent since 1995. Much of the increase is due to convicts reoffending; two out of every three prisoners released return to prison within three years."
The land of the free just stands way out from every other large country in its rate of imprisonment of its citizens.
That's a good idea, but I don't know where to find those stats. However, I can find the one the AC suggested:
Population in prison (2003):
USA: 2078570
China: 1549000
Actually the US produces closer to 29-30% of the world's goods with 25% of the world's "resources". So, we produce goods at a higher efficiency than the rest of the world (on average).
What is your source for those numbers? I don't doubt them (much; nationmaster.com says the US produces 23% of the world's GDP, but they can't even spell their own name right on their home page), but I'd like to look up how China compares. My guess would be that its ratio of goods produced per resources used would be a lot higher than the American ratio of 1.2.
The disadvantage of the filesystem back end is the proliferation of files. You get a new file with every commit. You need to be careful that your file system works well with a directory that might contain tens of thousands of files.
But you shouldn't lose a repository if bdb corrupts -- you should just lose the commits since the last backup. If you're running without backups, then you'd better watch out for hardware failures, system theft, fires, floods, etc.
They look like toys for an 8-year-old.
Did you miss this quote from the submission?
I admit, booting the system to "what is your bidding my master", sounds appealing.
They are toys for an 8-year-old.
Why do you find this scary? I think it's tremendous news that I'll have a petabyte (one million gigabytes) in my DVR in a couple of years. So what that those Dutch guys will have to pay $4,300,000 for one? I don't live there.
Or maybe the Register got some of the details wrong in this article...
I think it's safe to say comments are for the benefit of those who have not assimilated their language, their APIs, etc.
When you write something, are you sure that only someone who knows as much as you about the problem is going to look at it?
I've been programming for longer than you have, and I know that [me next year] is going to benefit from comments that [me now] puts in my code, because [me now] knows the context of the problem, and [me next year] will have forgotten a lot of it. [Me now] may have learned some horrible API in order to write the code, and [me next year] won't have used it for a year.
And if someone else is looking at my code next year, they'll likely know even less than [me next year].
This is a cool way to increase your karma: post the same thing twice, and the moderators will mod both copies up!
Comments, at ***BEST***, tell you what the author of the comment *hopes* was going on, at the time it was written. The code that follows may well not do anything of the sort; it may have, at one point, only to have been re-written by somebody else at a later date; it may still do what was stated, though that's no longer what's needed.
Code can have bugs and it doesn't always do what was intended. Sometimes comments have errors too.
We don't throw up our hands and say "never write code, it might not be perfect", so why do that over incorrect comments?
Learn to do your job right. Don't depend on what was written in any comments. The compiler ignores comments; so should you.
As your own experience showed you, sometimes what was written in the code can't be depended on either. Compilers can have bugs too.
I don't need to go to a US bank, I can see a picture here. I agree they're the nicest looking US bills, but I think being the best looking US banknote still doesn't put it in the same league as most other countries' currency.
They are still available because they never make it to the Federal Reserve banks. The FR banks scan incoming currency for wear or age and remove offending bills from circulation, replacing the bills with newly printed bills to equal the quantity of removed currency.
The Canadian system is the same. But the US printed 100 million $2 bills last year, the first printing in the 2000's. (By comparison, they print several billion 1's every year. The print run of the $2's is by far the smallest of any denomination still being printed.)
Are the $2's printed entirely for novelty value? That makes no sense for a banknote that is so easy to forge.
Okay, this makes no sense. $2 bills are legal tender, fine. But why are they still available? What use is it to have bills circulating when lots of vendors have never seen them, and won't be able to recognize the difference between real ones and ones you printed up on your inkjet printer?
In Canada, $1 and $2 bills are still legal tender, but you almost never see them, because they were withdrawn from circulation when the coins were introduced. But in the USA, they're still printing $2's, but hardly any of them compared to other denominations.
I work at Best Buy. We do not track people ...
But I notice you don't deny giving Canadian quarters in change...
Not entirely true. You must accept it for DEBTS. You do not have to accept it for products and services yet to be rendered. In this case, they are not obligated to accept it.
This was a case where the customer had something installed, and after the fact Best Buy decided to charge him for installation. It was a debt.
So, look at this. I am being materially negatively impacted by a company whose products I don't even buy. How, exactly, is the invisible hand of the market going to help with this?
You need to use a visible hand to get the invisible hand to work. Put together and win a class action suit, cost them lots of money. Then the price of Windows will go up, and fewer people will use it.
I like the last line in the article:
"Some analysts have said that [requiring visas from EU citizens] could mean a loss of more than $10 billion US to the U.S. travel industry."
So if those EU tourists aren't spending their $10G in the USA, they'll probably spend it in the EU, Asia, Canada, etc.
Kind of eases the pain, doesn't it?
No, they don't need the support of the other parties. The Prime Minister would tell the Governor-General that he wished to dissolve the government. The G-G would ask the opposition if they could form a government instead. Since there's no way the other parties could form a stable government, an election would be called.
Also, if you have cached a copy of the web page (say in your individual browser cache, or if your company has a caching proxy server), there is arguably a duty to preserve that cached copy.
This doesn't sound very practical to me. The people who know what's in the cache won't know which items in it are mentioned in email messages like this one: "Hey, you see what Enron did in that story on news.com.com today? We did the same thing!" So should they back up everything in the whole cache?