Imagine if you had a password that you couldn't change, and you dropped pieces of it everywhere you go. That's what your fingerprint is.
Not only that, but gun owners don't want additional potential failure points in their firearms. I'm not surprised they couldn't find buyers for their previous watch-radio-wave enabled design.
I am a part of such a professional organization, APEGA (the Association of Professional Engineers and Geoscientists of Alberta), and usually they don't exist in a vacuum, but are given their authority by Government statute.
To be clear, TFA specifically mentions nurses/midwives promoting anti-vaccine movements on social-media, in other words, in their private lives.
If a nurse/midwife were to say something to a patient, in a professional medical setting, that is a completely different thing. It would fall under the same restrictions and penalties that prevent them from prescribing medication or providing a diagnosis, which already exist. There are things only a doctor can do, and things only a nurse can do; only a doctor should be able to provide medical guidance or advice to a patient.
The point is, there is no need for this law, it merely restricts the free speech of people in their private lives, simply because they are of a particular profession.
It's all well and good to say the Government should restrict speech when you're in the majority, but you create a very dangerous precedent. Imagine a situation where 50% + 1 believe that vaccines are dangerous, and a law is passed banning medical professionals from speaking about the benefits of vaccines. It is based on the exact same principle, which is one of lawmaking, not one of science.
Even in science it would be wrong to arbitrarily silence dissent: if there are medical professionals or researchers who, through valid application of the scientific method, want to show that vaccines are dangerous, they should not be prevented from doing so.
I'm OK with laws requiring vaccines if you want your children to attend public school, or even those considering it a form of child abuse to refuse to vaccinate them. These types of laws are based on a completely different principle, the same one that says you don't have a choice whether to feed your child or not.
The Government is not, and should never be, the ultimate arbiter of truth. What comes next, anti-blasphemy laws?
I didn't give up my essential Liberty (privacy) to purchase temporary Safety, I gave it up to "purchase" the privilege of being able to legally drive... Should the government not be allowed to keep a record of valid driver's licenses somewhere?
To me, the real issue related to the Government tracking our data is that we don't know what they're tracking or what they have on us. In the case of a driver's license, I have a pretty good idea: my picture, my DOB, my address (at the time), my registration (hence the kind of car I drive, license plate, etc.), any prior tickets that I have... and I think that's about it. And again, I chose to give all that information to them. If I didn't want to drive I didn't have to. That's the difference I think.
Oh wait you also don't know how simple autopilot is in real life and apply your own pre-conception to the term?
But that's exactly the problem. Most people don't understand what an autopilot is, so when they hear the term they apply that exact pre-conception. I imagine that some portion of training new pilots involves a very specific explanation of what the auto-pilot is capable of, and, more importantly, what it isn't capable of. Until auto-pilot systems become ubiquitous in cars (which may be superseded by fully autonomous vehicles before that can happen), it doesn't make sense to include this kind of training for every new driver. Not to mention all the existing drivers who would have to go back to driving school to learn it.
The much simpler solution is for Tesla to change the name. In this case, perception trumps reality for the sake of safety. Yes, we are pandering to the ignorant, but if we could stop them from being ignorant, there wouldn't be a problem in the first place.
The presence of dark matter is inferred from the behavior of individual galaxies. The gravitational binding energy of galaxies should be much higher than what we can attribute to baryonic matter alone. So even though there are more galaxies than we thought, they still require dark matter to account for this discrepancy.
Basically, if we assume that 20x the number of galaxies means 20x the amount of baryonic matter (which not necessarily true, but whatever), then there must be 20x the amount of dark matter as well. So the ratio of baryonic matter to dark matter would remain the same.
The speed of light limits how fast you can travel through space. The expansion of the universe is due to space itself expanding, and there is no limit (as far as we know) to how fast this can happen.
Okay, what's the minimum delta-v required to pull that off?
The best answer I could find (without a ton of effort, honestly) is this. I have no idea how the calculation is done, so I can't comment on the accuracy, but the claim is that a bi-elliptic transfer could potentially do it in between 3000-8000 m/s (from LEO). Take that for what it's worth.
we got probes to Mercury
Yeah -- With payload masses ranging from 1/2 to 1 metric ton...
Fair enough.
Without in-depth research, there seem to be at least 70,000,000 metric tons of nuclear waste in the US alone
Whoa, I think you're off by an order of magnitude. According to this, the entire industry has only produced 76,430 metric tons in the last 4 decades, and is currently generating between about 2,000 metric tons every year.
You don't have to decelerate the entire 70,000 mph, because you're not trying to land softly on the sun. All you actually have to do is lower the periapsis of your orbit such that it ends up inside the sun. I mean, we got probes to Mercury, which would have required additional energy to actually be captured in orbit, which we don't care about in this case.
Channel length is a physical measurement and it does not change with applied bias.
This is only true with "long" channel MOSFETS. Once you get down below a certain size, you get "short channel effects" including the narrowing of the inverted channel region with increased bias, called channel length modulation.
Otherwise this sentence from the abstract, which is what the OP was referring to, makes no sense:
Simulations show an effective channel length of ~3.9 nm in the Off state and ~1 nm in the On state
from the paper's abstract: "Simulations show an effective channel length of ~3.9 nm in the Off state". what does this mean? that the gate, in it's off state, needs 4nm or it will start interfering with nearby gates?
The word Gate is not referring to a logic gate (which is what it sounds like you're inferring), but to the Gate terminal of the transistor. When the correct polarity of voltage is applied to the Gate, the field effect causes a channel of charge carriers to form between 2 other terminals, the Source and Drain, allowing current to flow between them. The channel length refers to the distance between the Source and Drain terminals.
The channel length (as well as other parameters like the width, charge carrier mobility, etc.) determines how much current can flow between the Drain and Source when a given voltage is applied (i.e. resistance). By applying higher voltage to the Gate, you are narrowing the "effective" channel length (lowering the resistance).
When you switch transistors on and off, you are basically charging and discharging capacitors, which takes time. How much time is determined by the time constant, RC (resistance x capacitance). So, shorter channel length = lower resistance = smaller time constant = faster charge/discharge = higher speeds. That's why we make transistors smaller to make computers faster.
The people (particularly Republicans) who prefer Hilary to Trump are assholes in the first place, and are better off leaving the party.
By all means, narrow your voter base even more. With any luck I'll die at a ripe old age having never again lived under a Republican President. You'll be begging to have Merrick Garland back up for confirmation when HRC puts Obama on the Supreme Court. He's only 55, and pretty healthy, probably live to at least 90. Having Scalia killed was the smartest thing we secret Communist Muslims Marxist Fascists ever did. Mwahahahaha!
Except that the only people who can terminate the CEO are the Board of Directors, who can use whatever criteria they want within Yahoo's Articles of Incorporation.
Currently, there is no legal requirement for a company like Apple to have a way that they & only can unlock a phone, in fact they've purposely engineered ways to make it more difficult.
Absolutely. A "masterkey" system like that would be such a huge target for corporate/government espionage. It becomes the Golden Snitch. Even if it took decades to plant someone at Apple and have them work their way up to gain access, it would still be worth it.
Slashdot Mirror
... What's the A stand for?
Imagine if you had a password that you couldn't change, and you dropped pieces of it everywhere you go. That's what your fingerprint is.
Not only that, but gun owners don't want additional potential failure points in their firearms. I'm not surprised they couldn't find buyers for their previous watch-radio-wave enabled design.
I am a part of such a professional organization, APEGA (the Association of Professional Engineers and Geoscientists of Alberta), and usually they don't exist in a vacuum, but are given their authority by Government statute.
To be clear, TFA specifically mentions nurses/midwives promoting anti-vaccine movements on social-media, in other words, in their private lives.
If a nurse/midwife were to say something to a patient, in a professional medical setting, that is a completely different thing. It would fall under the same restrictions and penalties that prevent them from prescribing medication or providing a diagnosis, which already exist. There are things only a doctor can do, and things only a nurse can do; only a doctor should be able to provide medical guidance or advice to a patient.
The point is, there is no need for this law, it merely restricts the free speech of people in their private lives, simply because they are of a particular profession.
It's all well and good to say the Government should restrict speech when you're in the majority, but you create a very dangerous precedent. Imagine a situation where 50% + 1 believe that vaccines are dangerous, and a law is passed banning medical professionals from speaking about the benefits of vaccines. It is based on the exact same principle, which is one of lawmaking, not one of science.
Even in science it would be wrong to arbitrarily silence dissent: if there are medical professionals or researchers who, through valid application of the scientific method, want to show that vaccines are dangerous, they should not be prevented from doing so.
I'm OK with laws requiring vaccines if you want your children to attend public school, or even those considering it a form of child abuse to refuse to vaccinate them. These types of laws are based on a completely different principle, the same one that says you don't have a choice whether to feed your child or not.
The Government is not, and should never be, the ultimate arbiter of truth. What comes next, anti-blasphemy laws?
I didn't give up my essential Liberty (privacy) to purchase temporary Safety, I gave it up to "purchase" the privilege of being able to legally drive... Should the government not be allowed to keep a record of valid driver's licenses somewhere?
To me, the real issue related to the Government tracking our data is that we don't know what they're tracking or what they have on us. In the case of a driver's license, I have a pretty good idea: my picture, my DOB, my address (at the time), my registration (hence the kind of car I drive, license plate, etc.), any prior tickets that I have... and I think that's about it. And again, I chose to give all that information to them. If I didn't want to drive I didn't have to. That's the difference I think.
A nod's as good as a wink to a blind bat. Say no more, say no more.
Oh wait you also don't know how simple autopilot is in real life and apply your own pre-conception to the term?
But that's exactly the problem. Most people don't understand what an autopilot is, so when they hear the term they apply that exact pre-conception. I imagine that some portion of training new pilots involves a very specific explanation of what the auto-pilot is capable of, and, more importantly, what it isn't capable of. Until auto-pilot systems become ubiquitous in cars (which may be superseded by fully autonomous vehicles before that can happen), it doesn't make sense to include this kind of training for every new driver. Not to mention all the existing drivers who would have to go back to driving school to learn it.
The much simpler solution is for Tesla to change the name. In this case, perception trumps reality for the sake of safety. Yes, we are pandering to the ignorant, but if we could stop them from being ignorant, there wouldn't be a problem in the first place.
That's right, I forgot that's what happened.
A sample size of 35? That's pretty pathetic. Not even 35 families, just 35 individual 'caregivers'.
Yep, both Witcher 2 and 3 had no DRM.
The presence of dark matter is inferred from the behavior of individual galaxies. The gravitational binding energy of galaxies should be much higher than what we can attribute to baryonic matter alone. So even though there are more galaxies than we thought, they still require dark matter to account for this discrepancy.
Basically, if we assume that 20x the number of galaxies means 20x the amount of baryonic matter (which not necessarily true, but whatever), then there must be 20x the amount of dark matter as well. So the ratio of baryonic matter to dark matter would remain the same.
The speed of light limits how fast you can travel through space. The expansion of the universe is due to space itself expanding, and there is no limit (as far as we know) to how fast this can happen.
Okay, what's the minimum delta-v required to pull that off?
The best answer I could find (without a ton of effort, honestly) is this. I have no idea how the calculation is done, so I can't comment on the accuracy, but the claim is that a bi-elliptic transfer could potentially do it in between 3000-8000 m/s (from LEO). Take that for what it's worth.
we got probes to Mercury
Yeah -- With payload masses ranging from 1/2 to 1 metric ton...
Fair enough.
Without in-depth research, there seem to be at least 70,000,000 metric tons of nuclear waste in the US alone
Whoa, I think you're off by an order of magnitude. According to this, the entire industry has only produced 76,430 metric tons in the last 4 decades, and is currently generating between about 2,000 metric tons every year.
You don't have to decelerate the entire 70,000 mph, because you're not trying to land softly on the sun. All you actually have to do is lower the periapsis of your orbit such that it ends up inside the sun. I mean, we got probes to Mercury, which would have required additional energy to actually be captured in orbit, which we don't care about in this case.
Channel length is a physical measurement and it does not change with applied bias.
This is only true with "long" channel MOSFETS. Once you get down below a certain size, you get "short channel effects" including the narrowing of the inverted channel region with increased bias, called channel length modulation.
Otherwise this sentence from the abstract, which is what the OP was referring to, makes no sense:
Simulations show an effective channel length of ~3.9 nm in the Off state and ~1 nm in the On state
from the paper's abstract: "Simulations show an effective channel length of ~3.9 nm in the Off state". what does this mean? that the gate, in it's off state, needs 4nm or it will start interfering with nearby gates?
The word Gate is not referring to a logic gate (which is what it sounds like you're inferring), but to the Gate terminal of the transistor. When the correct polarity of voltage is applied to the Gate, the field effect causes a channel of charge carriers to form between 2 other terminals, the Source and Drain, allowing current to flow between them. The channel length refers to the distance between the Source and Drain terminals.
The channel length (as well as other parameters like the width, charge carrier mobility, etc.) determines how much current can flow between the Drain and Source when a given voltage is applied (i.e. resistance). By applying higher voltage to the Gate, you are narrowing the "effective" channel length (lowering the resistance).
When you switch transistors on and off, you are basically charging and discharging capacitors, which takes time. How much time is determined by the time constant, RC (resistance x capacitance). So, shorter channel length = lower resistance = smaller time constant = faster charge/discharge = higher speeds. That's why we make transistors smaller to make computers faster.
The people (particularly Republicans) who prefer Hilary to Trump are assholes in the first place, and are better off leaving the party.
By all means, narrow your voter base even more. With any luck I'll die at a ripe old age having never again lived under a Republican President. You'll be begging to have Merrick Garland back up for confirmation when HRC puts Obama on the Supreme Court. He's only 55, and pretty healthy, probably live to at least 90. Having Scalia killed was the smartest thing we secret Communist Muslims Marxist Fascists ever did. Mwahahahaha!
Except that the only people who can terminate the CEO are the Board of Directors, who can use whatever criteria they want within Yahoo's Articles of Incorporation.
What about 8 out of the 11 members of Yahoo's Board of DIrectors? The CEO is not "the power" at a company, they serve at the discretion of the Board.
Currently, there is no legal requirement for a company like Apple to have a way that they & only can unlock a phone, in fact they've purposely engineered ways to make it more difficult.
Absolutely. A "masterkey" system like that would be such a huge target for corporate/government espionage. It becomes the Golden Snitch. Even if it took decades to plant someone at Apple and have them work their way up to gain access, it would still be worth it.
The energy in that coal and oil ultimately came from the aforementioned giant fusion reactor, just sayin'.
It just so happens I have the inside track on a nuclear reactor that's slated to be operational for at least the next few billion years.
At least give Conservation some of the blame. :(
The poor in the US average less than 15 hours a week working.
Yeah, that sounds like complete bullshit, unless you're counting children or something. Citation please?