IANAAP, but on the surface of it, ECOs are interesting because they do not involve a singularity. ...and black holes are interesting because they do involve a singularity.
Leaded paint is more durable and so there's a chance that their was a purely economic motive for unregulated Chinese factories using it instead of safer alternatives.
I was wondering the same thing. So many of the house fires are started by these relatively small embers blown by the wind. Something as simple but impractical as a big fireplace screen would be sufficient to protect the homes.
Prevention is important, you're right. But we are in the middle of a record drought and the Santa Anna winds were unbelievably strong. When the conditions are so perfect for fire there is really nothing reasonable that can be done to prevent it.
If I manage to make one persons conviction about throwing money at disasters waver, I'm satisfied. And maybe if you're lucky it will be the person who was going to help when disaster strikes your area.
First of all, essential is subjective. American's probably consider electricity to be essential but humans managed quite well without. The only things that are truly essential are food, water, air and shelter and I imagine he has those all covered adequately.
Secondly the fact that "essential" is subjective undermines nothing. RMS thinks a computer is essential. RMS doesn't think nice clothes are essential. Therefore he chooses to spend money on a computer while not spending any on suits. What's the confusion here?
How is it a sweeping statement? "right-wing California" refers to the right wing parts of California. Pretty much everything but the coast excluding Orange County and parts of San Diego.
You haven't convinced me that it's not a pretty weak commandment. Other religions and philosophies have made the much stronger statement that killing is wrong. What sort of a commandment is it to say you shouldn't kill unless you have reason to. It's a weak moral stance that has allowed countless deaths to be justified by the governments, churches, and individuals that caused them.
Both outline circumstances where killing is morally correct
Many of which are morally reprehensible to any modern civilization.
Translating the commandment as "murder" turns it into a really impotent commandment. As long as the people already had a concept of "wrong" killing and "right" killing, then telling them "wrong" killing is wrong is pretty useless. The history of western civilization should prove that some stronger language was warranted.
She'll win the Democratic nomination I meant. In the general she still has a good chance of winning just because the Republican field is so unspeakably bad. But what do I know, I've been shocked and appalled by the electorate before.
Well, the only good thing that can be said about Clinton is that she's far better than any of the Republican candidates. At least she seems pretty reluctant to use torture, unlike the Republicans who except for McCain and maybe Ron Paul wet themselves arguing over who will beat the shit out of more "terrorists". It's nauseating to me that an American presidential candidate would ever say he'd like to see a "double Guantanamo". The Republican field has no respect for the Constitutional that has made us what we are for the past two hundred and some years.
But yes, you are right. She's the worst of the Democrat candidates but she'll win because she's who the media and the monied interests decided on.
I understand the concept of libertarianism, which is why you're explanation doesn't clear up anything. You must be confused because this isn't about government censorship, this is about a private company doing what it wants (i.e. opting not to accept money to publish an ad). They are freely exercising their rights and that's exactly why a libertarian should not object.
As a libertarian, why aren't you applauding Google's ability to do what they want without government intervention? Criticizing them for this doesn't seem very libertarian to me.
You're right, Chinese text is frequently printed horizontally left to right. Most frequently from my experience. None of the Chinese language newspapers I've seen here in Southern California use vertical text. The only time I've seen vertical text was in formal situations.
Chinese text can also be seen written horizontally from right to left on some old signs and buildings. This comes from before horizontal writing was common and is actually a special case of vertical printing where there is room for only one row of characters.
Slashdot Mirror
Sometimes, yes. Anyway good luck with the angels. Let us know when you meet one.
The fact that she knows 6+ languages qualifies as geeky in my book. That's an impressive intellectual accomplishment, no two ways about it.
Time isn't that complicated, it's just a measure of change. Do we really need vibrating strings to have change?
The defaults command is nothing new, that's been a part of OS X from the beginning.
Leaded paint is more durable and so there's a chance that their was a purely economic motive for unregulated Chinese factories using it instead of safer alternatives.
Cite your sources AC. IIRC that idea comes from the book "Freakonomics" by Steven Levitt.
I was wondering the same thing. So many of the house fires are started by these relatively small embers blown by the wind. Something as simple but impractical as a big fireplace screen would be sufficient to protect the homes.
Prevention is important, you're right. But we are in the middle of a record drought and the Santa Anna winds were unbelievably strong. When the conditions are so perfect for fire there is really nothing reasonable that can be done to prevent it.
First of all, essential is subjective. American's probably consider electricity to be essential but humans managed quite well without. The only things that are truly essential are food, water, air and shelter and I imagine he has those all covered adequately.
Secondly the fact that "essential" is subjective undermines nothing. RMS thinks a computer is essential. RMS doesn't think nice clothes are essential. Therefore he chooses to spend money on a computer while not spending any on suits. What's the confusion here?
How is it a sweeping statement? "right-wing California" refers to the right wing parts of California. Pretty much everything but the coast excluding Orange County and parts of San Diego.
Considering the importance of free software to the "ideals he cares about", I would guess computers are quite essential to him.
You haven't convinced me that it's not a pretty weak commandment. Other religions and philosophies have made the much stronger statement that killing is wrong. What sort of a commandment is it to say you shouldn't kill unless you have reason to. It's a weak moral stance that has allowed countless deaths to be justified by the governments, churches, and individuals that caused them.
Many of which are morally reprehensible to any modern civilization.
Translating the commandment as "murder" turns it into a really impotent commandment. As long as the people already had a concept of "wrong" killing and "right" killing, then telling them "wrong" killing is wrong is pretty useless. The history of western civilization should prove that some stronger language was warranted.
She'll win the Democratic nomination I meant. In the general she still has a good chance of winning just because the Republican field is so unspeakably bad. But what do I know, I've been shocked and appalled by the electorate before.
Well, the only good thing that can be said about Clinton is that she's far better than any of the Republican candidates. At least she seems pretty reluctant to use torture, unlike the Republicans who except for McCain and maybe Ron Paul wet themselves arguing over who will beat the shit out of more "terrorists". It's nauseating to me that an American presidential candidate would ever say he'd like to see a "double Guantanamo". The Republican field has no respect for the Constitutional that has made us what we are for the past two hundred and some years.
But yes, you are right. She's the worst of the Democrat candidates but she'll win because she's who the media and the monied interests decided on.
I understand the concept of libertarianism, which is why you're explanation doesn't clear up anything. You must be confused because this isn't about government censorship, this is about a private company doing what it wants (i.e. opting not to accept money to publish an ad). They are freely exercising their rights and that's exactly why a libertarian should not object.
As a libertarian, why aren't you applauding Google's ability to do what they want without government intervention? Criticizing them for this doesn't seem very libertarian to me.
They voted for Bush twice, and you say they don't have a sense of humor?
You're right, Chinese text is frequently printed horizontally left to right. Most frequently from my experience. None of the Chinese language newspapers I've seen here in Southern California use vertical text. The only time I've seen vertical text was in formal situations.
Chinese text can also be seen written horizontally from right to left on some old signs and buildings. This comes from before horizontal writing was common and is actually a special case of vertical printing where there is room for only one row of characters.
You beat me to the zero gravity joke! I was going to mention the problem that pounds are worthless in zero gravity.
They had to scope it beyond our galaxy since no one in our galaxy has a use for it.