SC decisions don't pass, they're decided, and implying that the SC was bribed is a serious accusation. It could be argued (weakly, considering that each decision must be explained in writing) that the justices are the tools of the executives who appointed them, who are in turn tools of corporate America.
Also the idea that prices will rise overall is speculative. Prices can only be fixed in a monopoly, where they're already more or less fixed. When there's competition, price fixing is not an effective strategy.
Besides, none of this will affect all the stolen/counterfeit shit that's sold on eBay.
Besides audio differences, one just needs to look at the crossover/amps to see that certain bands have little to no signal on the MP3
There's a big difference between a spectrum analyzer and an ear. For starters, your ear absorbs all frequencies simultaneously, while a spectrum analyzer samples each one while filtering out the others, then displays the level of that frequency or band. This is much the same way a television only draws one pixel at a time, but it appears to be a complete image. It does this very fast, so it appears to be happening all at once, but it's not. In fact, the very reason a spectrum analyzer filters out all but one band (at a time) is because, when taken together, the individual frequencies are indistinguishable. All you have is the sum.
For example, look at the sine wave in this diagram. It appears to be a perfect sine wave, but as you probably know, it is actually a group of pixels approximating a sine wave. For all you know, there could be variations in that sine wave smaller than the pixel size on the bitmap. That apparent sine wave could also be the outline of a much higher frequency wave like this. There's just no way to know, except for what you can see, and what you assume the author's intent was. Audio is no different. This is not the same as a perfect sine wave, but the variance may be so small as to be imperceptible to your ear. When your eardrum is busy moving from its resting state to the point of maximum deflection, its inertia is such that it cannot respond to tiny variations, much the same way you can't feel each tiny piece of rock when you drive over concrete. So why keep them? You can't hear them, and they just take up more room in digital storage. Obviously some variations will be large enough that your ear can distinguish them, but good psycho-acoustic modeling accounts for the abilities of the most sensitive ear and keeps the variations that are perceptible. Low-bitrate encoding goes further for the sake of compression and quality is indeed lost. But using the maximum bitrate -- if the modeling was accurate, and they're all pretty accurate -- you will not be able to tell the difference.
If you can't escape from your caught pants by the end of a month-long ride on the space escalator, your near-term demise was probably inevitable anyway.
This is a big reason why Intel GPUs have been shown to be so bad when it comes to games.
That could be because Intel's "GPUs" are specifically designed to be affordable, basic 2D graphics chips in a market where virtually nobody else is making them. They're perfect for most laptop users and server hardware, especially rack mount, where 3D would never be used.
I know it's hard to believe there could be multiple Arabic people with the same name, but this was cleared up a long time ago.
Take the BBC, for example, which did in fact report, on September 23, 2001, that some of the alleged terrorists were alive and healthy and had protested their being named as assassins.
But there is one wrinkle. The BBC journalist responsible for the story only recalls this supposed sensation after having been told the date on which the story aired. "No, we did not have any videotape or photographs of the individuals in question at that time," he says, and tells us that the report was based on articles in Arab newspapers, such as the Arab News, an English-language Saudi newspaper.
The operator at the call center has the number for the Arab News on speed dial. We make a call to Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. A few seconds later, Managing Editor John Bradley is on the line. When we tell Bradley our story, he snorts and says: "That's ridiculous! People here stopped talking about that a long time ago."
Bradley tells us that at the time his reporters did not speak directly with the so-called "survivors," but instead combined reports from other Arab papers. These reports, says Bradley, appeared at a time when the only public information about the attackers was a list of names that had been published by the FBI on September 14th. The FBI did not release photographs until four days after the cited reports, on September 27th.
The photographs quickly resolved the nonsense about surviving terrorists. According to Bradley, "all of this is attributable to the chaos that prevailed during the first few days following the attack. What we're dealing with are coincidentally identical names." In Saudi Arabia, says Bradley, the names of two of the allegedly surviving attackers, Said al-Ghamdi and Walid al-Shari, are "as common as John Smith in the United States or Great Britain." http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiegel/0,1518 ,265160-2,00.html
Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door! Oh wait, no fingers!?! GTF outta here.. No really, get out.
I'm not going to compare you to this man any more than I just did. I went without television for most of my time in the military, and I didn't miss it. That said, I also missed out on a lot of what was going on in the world, and while I could get that insight from a newspaper, I now appreciate being able to see and hear what happened for myself, and the ability to get differing viewpoints with the press of a button. Just like the internet, it can be difficult to appreciate the undertones of what's being said, especially when people are being quoted. So I keep my cable for CNN (more specifically CNNi) and MSNBC, and the occasional times I put Nickelodeon or Cartoon Network on for the kids instead of the 5 millionth viewing of Nemo (although the abundant commercials frequently and quickly make me regret those occasions).
Yes, it's possible to obtain, and even watch, news online, but there's something to be said for sitting in something other than an office chair. That, and my bandwidth is typically saturated by other functions anyway.
Summer break may have started due to farming demands, but I have no problem with continuing it. You get to work year-round for the rest of your life.. no reason to impose that earlier than necessary. Also, summer provides an opportunity for those who want to get ahead, those who need to work and save money, and those who need remedial instruction (which can also serve as a near term, appreciable disincentive for kids to slack off).
Oops, I should mention two things about the link I provided. 1) I didn't read beyond the first caption before posting. 2) Nonetheless, the last paragraph emphasizes that it was a pilot training device, not a prototype for the lunar lander.
IANA Rocket Scientist, but don't you need a *lot* more thrust to hover in earth gravity than lunar gravity? It seems like the lander would have to be significantly over engineered to complete Level 2. For example, the lander legs have to be stronger (and heavier) to support the weight of the vehicle on earth.
Also, this test seems like it would eliminate any possible alternative to standard rocketry. Much the way a solar sail is useful in space, some alternative lower output thrust technology may be practical on the moon, but not on earth. It seems pretty obvious that when you're "testing" against a set of standards that are different than the operating environment, you're limiting yourself and/or overlooking important details.
As far as I can tell, NASA never flight tested the lunar lander, although it tried. All testing (and practice flights) were done on a gantry, yet it worked spectacularly on the moon.
A) Sorry, with a P/E of 31 (in times of plenty), this is a good example of an overinflated stock with unsustainable growth. (Sony's P/E is also high at 54 since investors are betting the PS3 will take off at some point -- I think they're right, but I still don't think it's a good buy.)
B) If Nintendo doesn't either start putting out some quality titles, or convincing third parties to do it for them, the Wii excitement will quickly turn to Wiimorse. I really *want* to like this console, but I haven't found a game yet that holds my attention, or my son's, with the exception of Paper Mario, and the caveat that it was too difficult for him, and too easy/tedious for anyone with a little Mario experience under their belt. And why it doesn't support either the "classic controller" (when holding the Wiimote sideways is anything but ergonomic) or motion sensing (when that's the main selling point of the console) is beyond me. Anyway, yeah. More and better games -- and soon!
You're just reverse biased like a Zener diode The interface is much improved like SILO It's gonna be hotter than FE2O3+2AL And Daniel Eran's just keepin' it real
According to the PERSEREC study, "one-fourth of known American spies experienced a personal life crisis (such as a divorce, death of someone close, or a love affair gone awry) in the months before they decided to attempt espionage."
Uh, so if only 25% had a life crisis, then that seems like a poor indicator. Moreover, what portion of people who have life crises go on to commit espionage? Since pretty much everyone has had one, I'm guessing it's negligible.
Drug or alcohol abuse.
Repeated irresponsibility.
An "above the rules" attitude.
Financial irresponsibility.
Repeated impulsive behaviors.
Extreme immaturity.
Willingness to violate the rights of others to achieve one's own ends.
Accumulating or overwhelming life crises or career disappointments.
Willingness to break rules or violations of laws and regulations.
With the exception of the 3rd to last, that describes a lot of people in college, and probably myself back in the day. Alcohol abuse? Check. Irresponsibility & financial irresponsibility? Check. Impulsive behavior? Check. Extreme immaturity? Probably an understatement. Of course, I realized all that was leading somewhere I didn't want to go and I changed my course, but even so, a lot of freshmen would fit that criteria.
And while all of their indicators are pertinant to government employees, especially those in law enforcement or military, they make little to no sense in the world of academia:
Unexplained affluence.
Failing to report overseas travel.
Showing unusual interest in information outside the job scope.
Keeping unusual work hours.
Taking classified material home.
Unreported or concealed contacts with foreign nationals.
Unreported contact with foreign government, military, or intelligence officials.
Attempting to gain new accesses without the need to know.
Unexplained absences.
To whom exactly is a student supposed to report, aside from the IRS in the case of finance? And I've never heard of someone getting classified training at a university (althogh maybe that's the idea). I'm fairly certain that the purpose of universities is to expand the whole of human knowledge, not to partition it off and keep it secret. Most universities allow pretty much anyone to sit in on a class, even if they're not enrolled (provided there's room and they're not disruptive of course). Aside from that, limiting information to those who've paid for it (enrolled) doesn't sound like a particularly secure system.
Also, the speed of anything is relative. We're moving thousands of MPH in relation to the sun, for example. The speed of sound internal to an object would always be measured relative to its length (or a part thereof), so unless it's accelerating faster than its speed of sound, you have nothing to worry about.
That, and planes are generally pushed, not pulled.
Slashdot Mirror
In a word, no.
If this doesn't bring my karma down ..... then we can safely assume the moderation system is horribly flawed.
At least you have a corporeal existance. I'm Tron, you truely insensitive clod.
Lacquer's wacker.
There is if you're a retailer, where for every 10 people who come in to save $10 on an iPod, 7 or 8 will buy other higher-markup products.
SC decisions don't pass, they're decided, and implying that the SC was bribed is a serious accusation. It could be argued (weakly, considering that each decision must be explained in writing) that the justices are the tools of the executives who appointed them, who are in turn tools of corporate America.
Also the idea that prices will rise overall is speculative. Prices can only be fixed in a monopoly, where they're already more or less fixed. When there's competition, price fixing is not an effective strategy.
Besides, none of this will affect all the stolen/counterfeit shit that's sold on eBay.
Even our genes are prolific risk takers. "I store my data like I store my genes, baby -- I keep no backups, but I give away copies for free! Woo!"
Besides audio differences, one just needs to look at the crossover/amps to see that certain bands have little to no signal on the MP3
There's a big difference between a spectrum analyzer and an ear. For starters, your ear absorbs all frequencies simultaneously, while a spectrum analyzer samples each one while filtering out the others, then displays the level of that frequency or band. This is much the same way a television only draws one pixel at a time, but it appears to be a complete image. It does this very fast, so it appears to be happening all at once, but it's not. In fact, the very reason a spectrum analyzer filters out all but one band (at a time) is because, when taken together, the individual frequencies are indistinguishable. All you have is the sum.
For example, look at the sine wave in this diagram. It appears to be a perfect sine wave, but as you probably know, it is actually a group of pixels approximating a sine wave. For all you know, there could be variations in that sine wave smaller than the pixel size on the bitmap. That apparent sine wave could also be the outline of a much higher frequency wave like this. There's just no way to know, except for what you can see, and what you assume the author's intent was. Audio is no different. This is not the same as a perfect sine wave, but the variance may be so small as to be imperceptible to your ear. When your eardrum is busy moving from its resting state to the point of maximum deflection, its inertia is such that it cannot respond to tiny variations, much the same way you can't feel each tiny piece of rock when you drive over concrete. So why keep them? You can't hear them, and they just take up more room in digital storage. Obviously some variations will be large enough that your ear can distinguish them, but good psycho-acoustic modeling accounts for the abilities of the most sensitive ear and keeps the variations that are perceptible. Low-bitrate encoding goes further for the sake of compression and quality is indeed lost. But using the maximum bitrate -- if the modeling was accurate, and they're all pretty accurate -- you will not be able to tell the difference.
If you can't escape from your caught pants by the end of a month-long ride on the space escalator, your near-term demise was probably inevitable anyway.
He was talking about the TB patient as well. GP = General Practitioner. He was told he posed no threat to the health and safety of others.
This is a big reason why Intel GPUs have been shown to be so bad when it comes to games.
That could be because Intel's "GPUs" are specifically designed to be affordable, basic 2D graphics chips in a market where virtually nobody else is making them. They're perfect for most laptop users and server hardware, especially rack mount, where 3D would never be used.
Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!
Oh wait, no fingers!?! GTF outta here..
No really, get out.
I'm not going to compare you to this man any more than I just did. I went without television for most of my time in the military, and I didn't miss it. That said, I also missed out on a lot of what was going on in the world, and while I could get that insight from a newspaper, I now appreciate being able to see and hear what happened for myself, and the ability to get differing viewpoints with the press of a button. Just like the internet, it can be difficult to appreciate the undertones of what's being said, especially when people are being quoted. So I keep my cable for CNN (more specifically CNNi) and MSNBC, and the occasional times I put Nickelodeon or Cartoon Network on for the kids instead of the 5 millionth viewing of Nemo (although the abundant commercials frequently and quickly make me regret those occasions).
Yes, it's possible to obtain, and even watch, news online, but there's something to be said for sitting in something other than an office chair. That, and my bandwidth is typically saturated by other functions anyway.
Summer break may have started due to farming demands, but I have no problem with continuing it. You get to work year-round for the rest of your life.. no reason to impose that earlier than necessary. Also, summer provides an opportunity for those who want to get ahead, those who need to work and save money, and those who need remedial instruction (which can also serve as a near term, appreciable disincentive for kids to slack off).
Oops, I should mention two things about the link I provided. 1) I didn't read beyond the first caption before posting. 2) Nonetheless, the last paragraph emphasizes that it was a pilot training device, not a prototype for the lunar lander.
IANA Rocket Scientist, but don't you need a *lot* more thrust to hover in earth gravity than lunar gravity? It seems like the lander would have to be significantly over engineered to complete Level 2. For example, the lander legs have to be stronger (and heavier) to support the weight of the vehicle on earth.
Also, this test seems like it would eliminate any possible alternative to standard rocketry. Much the way a solar sail is useful in space, some alternative lower output thrust technology may be practical on the moon, but not on earth. It seems pretty obvious that when you're "testing" against a set of standards that are different than the operating environment, you're limiting yourself and/or overlooking important details.
As far as I can tell, NASA never flight tested the lunar lander, although it tried. All testing (and practice flights) were done on a gantry, yet it worked spectacularly on the moon.
The amazing part is that it will work!
A) Sorry, with a P/E of 31 (in times of plenty), this is a good example of an overinflated stock with unsustainable growth. (Sony's P/E is also high at 54 since investors are betting the PS3 will take off at some point -- I think they're right, but I still don't think it's a good buy.)
B) If Nintendo doesn't either start putting out some quality titles, or convincing third parties to do it for them, the Wii excitement will quickly turn to Wiimorse. I really *want* to like this console, but I haven't found a game yet that holds my attention, or my son's, with the exception of Paper Mario, and the caveat that it was too difficult for him, and too easy/tedious for anyone with a little Mario experience under their belt. And why it doesn't support either the "classic controller" (when holding the Wiimote sideways is anything but ergonomic) or motion sensing (when that's the main selling point of the console) is beyond me. Anyway, yeah. More and better games -- and soon!
I stole GTA while playing the Cars. I guess it's just what I needed.
H&K is finally making laser blasters?
You're just reverse biased like a Zener diode
The interface is much improved like SILO
It's gonna be hotter than FE2O3+2AL
And Daniel Eran's just keepin' it real
And while all of their indicators are pertinant to government employees, especially those in law enforcement or military, they make little to no sense in the world of academia:To whom exactly is a student supposed to report, aside from the IRS in the case of finance? And I've never heard of someone getting classified training at a university (althogh maybe that's the idea). I'm fairly certain that the purpose of universities is to expand the whole of human knowledge, not to partition it off and keep it secret. Most universities allow pretty much anyone to sit in on a class, even if they're not enrolled (provided there's room and they're not disruptive of course). Aside from that, limiting information to those who've paid for it (enrolled) doesn't sound like a particularly secure system.
Woohoo, I can start smoking again! I'll just clone me a new lung when these ones go.
Also, the speed of anything is relative. We're moving thousands of MPH in relation to the sun, for example. The speed of sound internal to an object would always be measured relative to its length (or a part thereof), so unless it's accelerating faster than its speed of sound, you have nothing to worry about.
That, and planes are generally pushed, not pulled.