Re Fukushima: If you read the statement you'd see that they find the problem arising from Fukushima is that it caused a reduction in the amount of nuclear power being used, leading to increased reliance on burning fossil fuels.
They'd like safer reactor designs, so more people use nuclear power.
So what's that about integrity? You complain about them, without reading what they wrote?
I think most of the reports (the 15 mpg, the 100 mpg) are self-reports from the car, since the Prius has a display of its own estimates of current fuel efficiency, fuel efficiency over the last 5 minutes, and fuel efficiency since the last reset of the system. The current ones aren't very informative, and the American Prius maxes out at 99.9 mpg.
My Prius reports in l/100 km; it maxes out at 10, which corresponds to low efficiency, 23 mpg. It's common to get worse mileage than that instantaneously (e.g. while accelerating), but I've never seen a five minute average that bad. I reset the counter every time I fill it, and the worst tank of gas I've had was 7.4 l/100km (about 32 mpg, using those puny US gallons). The average over 2007-2011 is 5.26 l/100km (about 45 mpg).
Right, the votes don't tell you which of them won. But that's different than a tie, which says they got the same number of votes.
The votes just haven't been counted carefully enough to know who won. But it's almost certainly not a tie.
The journalism prof said "Scientists know that when you can't tell the difference between the two things, they say that, as best they can tell, these are the same size." Which just goes to show that he doesn't understand statistics very well. The correct interpretation of the result is that you can't prove there's a difference between the two. That's a weaker conclusion than concluding that they are equal.
I'm curious: have you told this woman what the standing orders are? They seem reasonable, but if she's serious about what she wants, she should be able to decide not to go to your pool.
If a phone is stolen, they get another sale. If the phone is unusable after being stolen, it's less likely to be stolen, so there are fewer thefts and fewer sales.
I'd disagree about the viewfinder, but these cameras are at the high end of the "few hundred dollars" specified. The only way I'd buy a mirrorless SLR is with an electronic viewfinder, and you won't find usable EVFs in the specified price range.
And of course, I'd personally never buy Sony. But that's just a matter of not trusting them.
I agree. The poster said "a few hundred dollars". If "a few" is "three", that's a bad price point. Spend less, or spend more. You can get really fantastic point and shoot cameras in the $150-200 range. You can get really fantastic entry-level digital SLRs in the $450-600 range. (And then you can spend as much more than that as you like, but you aren't getting good "entry-level" value any more.) But I don't think anything priced at $300 is worth buying. They are crap SLRs, and overpriced point and shoot.
I'd say a newbie should start at the low end, If you're happy there, you're happy. If you find it frustrating due to lack of control, then upgrade.
Some specific advice:
- Get a viewfinder in the low end. Don't rely on an LCD or other display on the camera. It's not until you're in the $600 range that those are usable.
- Don't pay for fancy "art filters" or other image processing in the camera. Get a few million pixels, and do your processing after you've downloaded the pictures.
- Don't pay for too many pixels. You get good quality pictures starting at around 2 megapixels; more is better, but you quickly run into diminishing returns (and storing bigger images takes up more disk space, flash card space, etc.). I wouldn't buy a 2 megapixel DSLR (you should do better than that), but I wouldn't pay for more in a point and shoot camera.
- Try it out in the store. If you can't figure out the menus to take a variety of pictures there, then don't buy it. You aren't going to read the manual. A variety includes: pictures with a flash and without; closeups, portraits, and landscapes.
some time later he becomes famous and his painting is sold to a new owner for a million euros. Shouldn't the artist get some of that money? or should only the "art industry" feed on it?
No, he shouldn't get any of that money. He should paint another painting and sell it for a million euros. (Or paint 100 more, sell each of them for 100K, and screw up the market.)
The eruption is near the island of El Hierro, about 90 km south of the volcano Cumbre Vieja on La Palma. A few years ago Cumbre Vieja was in the news as a possible source of a mega-tsunami that would devastate the west coasts of Africa and Europe and the east coast of North America. Wikipedia has the story: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cumbre_Vieja. The problem is that the volcano is unstable, and it could collapse and dump 500 km^3 of rock into the ocean.
Hopefully 90 km is far enough away not to bother it...
If you asked the liar which door he would point to if you asked him, he couldn't say he'd point to the wrong one because that'd be telling the truth. So he'd have to point to the correct one.
It's not just durability. Anti-reflection coatings also fail when someone touches the display and leaves behind a fingerprint: the oils in the fingerprint are thick enough to make it reflective again, so they really show up.
It's hard to get into a "top 100 ever" list in less than 5 years (it takes time to build up a following) but there are a lot from the last 20 years on that list: Neil Gaiman, Neal Stephenson (both multiply), Iain Banks, Vernor Vinge, Connie Willis.
But then I looked through the full list. You're right, it's full of crap and old stuff. My list above is too short.
That document contains the planned answers to potential questions before a parliamentary committee. They're designed to hide the truth and sounce reasonable. For example, the answer to the question about non-infringing use on p 10 sounds reasonable, but avoids the question: why can't consumers break TPMs for legal uses of the material?
Slashdot Mirror
Girls are genetically coded to think that their appearance is their most important attribute.
A claim like that needs some evidence, otherwise it just looks like the usual Slashdot gynophobia.
That's a really irritating web site.
Except for the penalties, all of the above are true in Canada:
- no corporate donations at all
- no donations from foreigners
- max donation of $1100 per person to a party
And our government is still in the pocket of the big media corporations.
Re Fukushima: If you read the statement you'd see that they find the problem arising from Fukushima is that it caused a reduction in the amount of nuclear power being used, leading to increased reliance on burning fossil fuels.
They'd like safer reactor designs, so more people use nuclear power.
So what's that about integrity? You complain about them, without reading what they wrote?
I think most of the reports (the 15 mpg, the 100 mpg) are self-reports from the car, since the Prius has a display of its own estimates of current fuel efficiency, fuel efficiency over the last 5 minutes, and fuel efficiency since the last reset of the system. The current ones aren't very informative, and the American Prius maxes out at 99.9 mpg.
My Prius reports in l/100 km; it maxes out at 10, which corresponds to low efficiency, 23 mpg. It's common to get worse mileage than that instantaneously (e.g. while accelerating), but I've never seen a five minute average that bad. I reset the counter every time I fill it, and the worst tank of gas I've had was 7.4 l/100km (about 32 mpg, using those puny US gallons). The average over 2007-2011 is 5.26 l/100km (about 45 mpg).
Right, the votes don't tell you which of them won. But that's different than a tie, which says they got the same number of votes.
The votes just haven't been counted carefully enough to know who won. But it's almost certainly not a tie.
The journalism prof said "Scientists know that when you can't tell the difference between the two things, they say that, as best they can tell, these are the same size." Which just goes to show that he doesn't understand statistics very well. The correct interpretation of the result is that you can't prove there's a difference between the two. That's a weaker conclusion than concluding that they are equal.
I'm curious: have you told this woman what the standing orders are? They seem reasonable, but if she's serious about what she wants, she should be able to decide not to go to your pool.
If a phone is stolen, they get another sale. If the phone is unusable after being stolen, it's less likely to be stolen, so there are fewer thefts and fewer sales.
I'm hearing May, which is like 6 months - not "literally a year".
He was using "literally" in the figurative sense.
I'd disagree about the viewfinder, but these cameras are at the high end of the "few hundred dollars" specified. The only way I'd buy a mirrorless SLR is with an electronic viewfinder, and you won't find usable EVFs in the specified price range.
And of course, I'd personally never buy Sony. But that's just a matter of not trusting them.
I agree. The poster said "a few hundred dollars". If "a few" is "three", that's a bad price point. Spend less, or spend more. You can get really fantastic point and shoot cameras in the $150-200 range. You can get really fantastic entry-level digital SLRs in the $450-600 range. (And then you can spend as much more than that as you like, but you aren't getting good "entry-level" value any more.) But I don't think anything priced at $300 is worth buying. They are crap SLRs, and overpriced point and shoot.
I'd say a newbie should start at the low end, If you're happy there, you're happy. If you find it frustrating due to lack of control, then upgrade.
Some specific advice:
- Get a viewfinder in the low end. Don't rely on an LCD or other display on the camera. It's not until you're in the $600 range that those are usable.
- Don't pay for fancy "art filters" or other image processing in the camera. Get a few million pixels, and do your processing after you've downloaded the pictures.
- Don't pay for too many pixels. You get good quality pictures starting at around 2 megapixels; more is better, but you quickly run into diminishing returns (and storing bigger images takes up more disk space, flash card space, etc.). I wouldn't buy a 2 megapixel DSLR (you should do better than that), but I wouldn't pay for more in a point and shoot camera.
- Try it out in the store. If you can't figure out the menus to take a variety of pictures there, then don't buy it. You aren't going to read the manual. A variety includes: pictures with a flash and without; closeups, portraits, and landscapes.
some time later he becomes famous and his painting is sold to a new owner for a million euros.
Shouldn't the artist get some of that money? or should only the "art industry" feed on it?
No, he shouldn't get any of that money. He should paint another painting and sell it for a million euros. (Or paint 100 more, sell each of them for 100K, and screw up the market.)
The eruption is near the island of El Hierro, about 90 km south of the volcano Cumbre Vieja on La Palma. A few years ago Cumbre Vieja was in the news as a possible source of a mega-tsunami that would devastate the west coasts of Africa and Europe and the east coast of North America. Wikipedia has the story: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cumbre_Vieja. The problem is that the volcano is unstable, and it could collapse and dump 500 km^3 of rock into the ocean.
Hopefully 90 km is far enough away not to bother it...
If you asked the liar which door he would point to if you asked him, he couldn't say he'd point to the wrong one because that'd be telling the truth. So he'd have to point to the correct one.
Or, he could say, "I don't know" :-).
According to TFA, about half of the ones that scan people are millimeter-wave, and half are x-ray.
It's not just durability. Anti-reflection coatings also fail when someone touches the display and leaves behind a fingerprint: the oils in the fingerprint are thick enough to make it reflective again, so they really show up.
The actual limit is 500 emails per day per recipient
That's not what their documentation says. It says
The maximum number of recipients that can receive e-mail messages sent from a single cloud-based mailbox in a 24 hour period.
and then lists various limits, including the 500 recipients per day for the small business product. Read it for yourself.
Those aren't "air quotes". Those are quotes. "Air quotes" are the ones you do with your fingers.
Here's what I was going to write:
It's hard to get into a "top 100 ever" list in less than 5 years (it takes time to build up a following) but there are a lot from the last 20 years on that list: Neil Gaiman, Neal Stephenson (both multiply), Iain Banks, Vernor Vinge, Connie Willis.
But then I looked through the full list. You're right, it's full of crap and old stuff. My list above is too short.
The humans are also allowed to study the cube before their time starts; the time for the robot included the time for the virtual solution.
"a single data point"
The point before the lowest one, and the 6 points afterwards.
You can see such a dip in the first graphic associated with this paper:
http://cdiac.ornl.gov/trends/co2/lawdome.html
2-3 years, not 120. The most an Apple laptop battery lasts is 2-3 years.
The question was about why there should be government enforcement of TPMs, and there was no answer for that. It was just stated that there should be.
That document contains the planned answers to potential questions before a parliamentary committee. They're designed to hide the truth and sounce reasonable. For example, the answer to the question about non-infringing use on p 10 sounds reasonable, but avoids the question: why can't consumers break TPMs for legal uses of the material?