I applaud your ability to parse a complex sentence; I'm sure you are a great lawyer. But the clear answer is, like this "firm worm", flashback could not be blocked by AV. It was blocked by iOS tho. NOT android.
the service will probably be focused on consumer rather than bidness use. but it could give different messages to different callers based on address book, as you say interrupt the phone owner for different needs, etc. I like siri. in fact, one of the things I miss most on my apple watch is siri's voice.
from what I've seen, the shakes are intended to be supplements and not a whole meal replacement. so you wouldn't eat 2000cal worth of shakes each day. also, no such thing as a kcal, what ever that is. 1 cal = the amount of energy it takes to heat a liter of water by 1 degree Celsius.
macs are not vulnerable to the types of malware that antivirus software could protect against
So if antivirus software protects against viruses, and you're claiming that Macs are not vulnerable to that type of malware, then aren't you claiming that Macs are immune to viruses?
worms such as the "firm worm" on this post cannot be prevented by antivirus software. so there is a class of malware that is not blocked by antivirus and even though macs are immune to malware that would otherwise be blocked by antivirus they can still be succeptible to this particular class and yet keep the general moniker immune to viruses that antivirus software would block.
Here's a question: if Macs are not vulnerable to viruses, then why are there antivirus programs for Macs?
AV exists for mac becuz windows switchers are stuck on this idea of "needing antivirus" and so shysters have stepped in to provide the product. not to mention all macs come with antivirus supplied by apple.
wat? explain again, is $4.86 per shake, or $4.86 per day of living only on shakes, or $4.86 on thrice day, is that three times a day or every three days? wat?
people's plans started to change in 2013/2014 as insurance companies started to adjust their offerings to take into consideration obamacare. For some consumers the price of their existing plan went up, for other consumers the health insurance company dropped the plan completely. In other cases while the ins co still offered the plan, the employer took this as an opportunity to save money by downgrading the quality of plans that are available to employees, or as my HR person called it, making plans "less rich".
The headline is sufficient for those who do not understand how the power grid works, and anyone who knows how the power grid works would not be misled by the headline.
Even though my bill says "100% wind" on it, and somewhere out there are windmill(s) generating as much electricity as my home consumes, the actual power consumed in my house might just as easily come from the coal plants up the highway. It's all on the same grid.
If you understand that, then it's obvious that "Power Every US Home With Renewables" means "Generate As Much Renewable Energy As All Homes Consume". What appears on the bills of those homeowners is irrelevant.
I disagree. If utilities had to provide 100% renewable power to every home, then it would need to have significant overcapacity, because it would need enough renewables for the PM peak and have idle renewables during other times. So to power homes with 100% renewables you would need to have many times more renewable capacity than homes consume.
Clinton Plan To Power Every US Home With Renewables By 2027 Is Achievable
but the summary says
Her plan, is to increase solar, wind and other renewables so that they'd provide 33% of America's electricity by 2027, enough to power every home.
what this means is that the amount of renewable generation would equal residential use, not that each house would be 100% renewable.
In CA Southern California Edison is currently 22% renewable, and they have plans to go to 27%. This doesn't include home generation like rooftop solar panels, which should count for the 33% goal.
Because the worst pieces of software are antivirus programs, but macs are not vulnerable to the types of malware that antivirus software could protect against. Nobody said that macs are immune to viruses, just as they are not immune to water damage, theft or if you throw them off your roof (although there's a cool video on YouTube where a MacBook Air fell out of a two-seater airplane, but was still functional when it was found on the ground).
If the 401k plan wasn't tied to the specific company I might be able to see your argument, but given that it's tied to the employer and all of the things that employer could do (ie, ride the company off the rails) I don't see how it could be considered better./quote.401ks arent tied to the employer. you can take them and run at any time.
The problem is half the people in the workforce are below average.
half the people are below the *median*. if the distribution of people's abilities is symmetric then it will be true for the average as well, but there's no reason to think that.
oh yeah totally. then why do i have so many modded up +5 comments? it's because i contribute my expertise to the community. be careful when throwing around words like troll, drinky-poo. you know what they say, i'm rubber, you're glue...
What's especially weird, if they're looking for dirty air, why are they starting in Denver then going to sf? The two most relevant cities are LA and Houston.
fine. i bet the co2 level outside at street level is never more than 10% higher than up in the sky. the things you describe are acute effects. in that vein, you could put carbon monoxide sensors in cars in case anybody tries to off themselves using tailpipe gas. when people talk about outdoor air pollution they are talking about chronic effects like i just described.
further, co2 isnt' an an air pollutant. it doesn't cause ozone, smog, bronchitis, heart disease or cancer. we all inhale it and exhale it every day. it's the new hotness but completely irrelevant when talking about air quality.
I would put air quality monitors at schools nationwide. that would be very relevant. also an effective way to drive policy, think of the children.
Slashdot Mirror
I applaud your ability to parse a complex sentence; I'm sure you are a great lawyer. But the clear answer is, like this "firm worm", flashback could not be blocked by AV. It was blocked by iOS tho. NOT android.
the service will probably be focused on consumer rather than bidness use. but it could give different messages to different callers based on address book, as you say interrupt the phone owner for different needs, etc. I like siri. in fact, one of the things I miss most on my apple watch is siri's voice.
from what I've seen, the shakes are intended to be supplements and not a whole meal replacement. so you wouldn't eat 2000cal worth of shakes each day. also, no such thing as a kcal, what ever that is. 1 cal = the amount of energy it takes to heat a liter of water by 1 degree Celsius.
macs are not vulnerable to the types of malware that antivirus software could protect against
So if antivirus software protects against viruses, and you're claiming that Macs are not vulnerable to that type of malware, then aren't you claiming that Macs are immune to viruses?
worms such as the "firm worm" on this post cannot be prevented by antivirus software. so there is a class of malware that is not blocked by antivirus and even though macs are immune to malware that would otherwise be blocked by antivirus they can still be succeptible to this particular class and yet keep the general moniker immune to viruses that antivirus software would block.
Here's a question: if Macs are not vulnerable to viruses, then why are there antivirus programs for Macs?
AV exists for mac becuz windows switchers are stuck on this idea of "needing antivirus" and so shysters have stepped in to provide the product. not to mention all macs come with antivirus supplied by apple.
wat? explain again, is $4.86 per shake, or $4.86 per day of living only on shakes, or $4.86 on thrice day, is that three times a day or every three days? wat?
-1 disagree. every single person on earth will tell you that flavor is important and that things that taste gross are bad. name one who doesn't.
people's plans started to change in 2013/2014 as insurance companies started to adjust their offerings to take into consideration obamacare. For some consumers the price of their existing plan went up, for other consumers the health insurance company dropped the plan completely. In other cases while the ins co still offered the plan, the employer took this as an opportunity to save money by downgrading the quality of plans that are available to employees, or as my HR person called it, making plans "less rich".
The headline is sufficient for those who do not understand how the power grid works, and anyone who knows how the power grid works would not be misled by the headline.
Even though my bill says "100% wind" on it, and somewhere out there are windmill(s) generating as much electricity as my home consumes, the actual power consumed in my house might just as easily come from the coal plants up the highway. It's all on the same grid.
If you understand that, then it's obvious that "Power Every US Home With Renewables" means "Generate As Much Renewable Energy As All Homes Consume". What appears on the bills of those homeowners is irrelevant.
I disagree. If utilities had to provide 100% renewable power to every home, then it would need to have significant overcapacity, because it would need enough renewables for the PM peak and have idle renewables during other times. So to power homes with 100% renewables you would need to have many times more renewable capacity than homes consume.
headline says:
Clinton Plan To Power Every US Home With Renewables By 2027 Is Achievable
but the summary says
Her plan, is to increase solar, wind and other renewables so that they'd provide 33% of America's electricity by 2027, enough to power every home.
what this means is that the amount of renewable generation would equal residential use, not that each house would be 100% renewable.
In CA Southern California Edison is currently 22% renewable, and they have plans to go to 27%. This doesn't include home generation like rooftop solar panels, which should count for the 33% goal.
Because the worst pieces of software are antivirus programs, but macs are not vulnerable to the types of malware that antivirus software could protect against. Nobody said that macs are immune to viruses, just as they are not immune to water damage, theft or if you throw them off your roof (although there's a cool video on YouTube where a MacBook Air fell out of a two-seater airplane, but was still functional when it was found on the ground).
Mac OS's don't get viruses. The firmware is something different, and besides its a worm not a virus.
I've never seen that meme here before. link(s)?
If the 401k plan wasn't tied to the specific company I might be able to see your argument, but given that it's tied to the employer and all of the things that employer could do (ie, ride the company off the rails) I don't see how it could be considered better./quote.401ks arent tied to the employer. you can take them and run at any time.
as long as you can bill for the re-work then you're good. may I also suggest raising his billing rate. source: I am a bidness man
The problem is half the people in the workforce are below average.
half the people are below the *median*. if the distribution of people's abilities is symmetric then it will be true for the average as well, but there's no reason to think that.
When you bought that foreign car, you voted with your money that auto workers in that country are better than domestic ones.
a lot of fords and chevys are made in mexico, and a lot of foreign brands are made in US. careful when you fling your jingoistic mud.
I thought it said legomaniac's disease. It's hard to browse on my phone.
Surprise surprise, yes you do. You have 2^9 and I have 2^5. Sock puppets?
oh yeah totally. then why do i have so many modded up +5 comments? it's because i contribute my expertise to the community. be careful when throwing around words like troll, drinky-poo. you know what they say, i'm rubber, you're glue...
I think instead of relying on "data" which are just numbers, you should ask somebody who is an expert in the field, like me.
I'm pretty sure I'm right. I don't need "data" to back me up. Hint, data just the plural of datum, which is just a a single number.
What's especially weird, if they're looking for dirty air, why are they starting in Denver then going to sf? The two most relevant cities are LA and Houston.
fine. i bet the co2 level outside at street level is never more than 10% higher than up in the sky. the things you describe are acute effects. in that vein, you could put carbon monoxide sensors in cars in case anybody tries to off themselves using tailpipe gas. when people talk about outdoor air pollution they are talking about chronic effects like i just described.
further, co2 isnt' an an air pollutant. it doesn't cause ozone, smog, bronchitis, heart disease or cancer. we all inhale it and exhale it every day. it's the new hotness but completely irrelevant when talking about air quality.
I would put air quality monitors at schools nationwide. that would be very relevant. also an effective way to drive policy, think of the children.
it's like being electrocuted while fixing your lamp for one second.