Yes, that was mentioned in TFA, specifically fresh water from Siberia cutting the East Greenland subduction. But that requires confirmation: has there been unusually heavy snow/rainfall there? I thought the place was semi-arrid. I can't see that much melt from Greenland, particularly not asymmetric.
Yes, I understand about the importance of salinity [density]. However, as a general principal, all convective heat/mass transfer mechanisms (including this one) are driven harder/faster by increasing differentials.
Sounds like someone wanted to validate the [bogus] science behind the moview "The Day After".
I have a lot of trouble believing that global warming (however caused) will _decrease_ ocean currents. I would expect it to do precisely the opposite, increase them, as driving forces (temperature differences) increase. Or does someone have data that global warming is more at the poles than at the equator?
What's wrong with blogsphere basking in soft money? It's not a push medium.
I'm also extremely leery of Campaign Finance "Reform". I'm afraid individual representatives and senators will lose power (funding) and become more whippable by their parties. I'd much rather the occasional corrupt congresscritter than bloc voting and potentially corrupt parties.
Well, democracy is founded upon some intelligence in the collective of voters. 'blogs are hardly new -- they used to circulate as newletters. Extraorderinary claims require extraordinary proof. And an "ad hominem" smear is inadvertant surrender: there is nothing more substantial to say.
As for low voting, the system makes it so. The Electoral College, incumbency and gerrymandering reduce the utility of voting except in swing areas. Plus the remarkably close actual actions of the parties.
Please! The amount of truthfulness and accuracy in commercial newspapers is highly variable. Sometimes it's good, othertimes it _way_ off base. Fact checkers cannot cover what is omitted, and much bias is in the wilful omissions.
I'd much rather deal with 'blog who make no pretense. I'll do my own fact checking rather than rely on unseen gnomes to do it to my satisfaction.
As usual, someone is worrying too much, and probably about the wrong things. First, filtering doesn't work. Look at the Great FIrewall of China. It may stop some (or even many) user, but it will not stop all, and clever people will help those less clever. Filtering on IP doesn't work with redirectors, and ports are a joke.
Second, conspiracy theorists assume motivations to fit their worldview. In most cases, their adversaries have no interest in them (assuming it is the egotism). In this case, it assumes telcos are competant and visionary. Neither has been much in evidence. Telcos shovel bits, and do that reasonably well. None has the slightest clue about content. Telcos will push their bit shovelling any way they can. Proprietary content is a dead-end -- look at AOL.
Well, well. Somebody's knickers got in a twist. And they decided to sue. Of course they can do that, but at their peril.
Cdn law is different from US law in a number of important instiutional details. The judge can and will award costs. Even if the company is technically correct, it could still wind up paying the defense costs. Automagically if the defendant pays a nominal sum "into court" and the award is less than this.
The only [slight] advantage to 48VDC is intergration with UPS. Otherwise it's all negative: Require 48VDC->ATX converters at each CPU (non-standard, unreliable and hot); 48VDC is still high voltage according to NEC, so everything has to be listed & UL std; DC->DC conversion very EMI noisy (worse than AC->DC).
I'm an asm pgmr, and do lots of cycle counting. These numbers are screwey. First, RDTSC (read Cycle counter)_takes 16-40 clocks, depending on CPU. ABI/OS calls & yieldsound about right, mostly because every OS has the Ring3-r0-R3 transitions to do, except Singularity with forgoes this protection.
The real screwy number is Proc creation. I haven't timed recently, lbut I'd expect vfork() or exec() from RAM buffers to take
It's not the end of the earth, but they're going to need large #0 and #)) copper cables to carry the enormous currents at the low voltage drops required. I'd suggest a ring topology.
Yes, central DC is attractive from a number of viewpoints: easier redundancy, higher efficiency, integratable into UPS and perhaps most important these days -- removing headload from CPU bays. But you're gonna need big busbars, especially if your boards need 3.3V. I can't see using some sort of non-custom miniPSUs to do12VDC to ATX.
Are you a french lawyer? I thought their system [Napoleonic Code} was deliberately vague. What constitutes publishing is up for grabs. Or might well be in other countries. The point is prior restraint, and censorship wins.
As for the Nazis, of course they were often evil people doing horrible things. Particularly around their internment program and The Final Solution But did they never do anything good? Did Allies never do anything wrong? Prewar vilification of "The Huns", the Hunger Blockade? Versailles, Dresden? Critical examination can always be dismissed as apology, or confounded with advocacy. Particularly by those with no refutation.
French authorities might well consider anything written on USENET or a blog to have been said/published in their country, hence a crime. The internet blurs international boundaries, and publication anywhere is publication everywhere. Or at least, might well be so considered. Look at eBay's Nazi memorobilia auctions.
I'm well familiar with the French, both their dry humor and cynical view of govt. Freedom fries are also a joke in the US outside the Beltway.
This is a downside to the Internet: it also spreads censorship. For example, Americans have to watch what they say or risk French arrest should they ever go there or anywhere extraditible (the EU?). Perhaps the US govt will intervene to protect it's citizens. Perhaps not.
It is very unclear, and this FUD is the real and desired effect of censorship. Prior restraint.
This was fairly obviously a "Work-for-Hire",which has special copyright protection, in essence it is the employers even if he later regrets that decision.
One reading of the US Constitution would agree with you. However, the SCOTUS has read it differently, and allows federal law & regulation of anything with potential interstate impact. I guess the idea is that locals should not be able to affect interstate commerce in any way, or hold thier populations hostage to local merchants.
Westchester County might well pass a law forbidding wardriving and have some hope of it surviving challenge. Written against providers is far weaker legally, but might be easier to enforce. But when it is, it might not survive a determined challenge. They're probably counting on a lack of determination. But they're forgetting the EFF, who will probably salivate at such a case.
A legislative body can pass whatever they want, but it might not withstand legal challenge. In this case, I don't see how the county can show an interest. This is clearly interstate, and the FCC has jurisdiction.
AC wrote: And how many Western Democracies have secret agents blowing up their own populace at train stations or twin towers daily? Yes, lets do compare civilaztion with animals again, shall we?
Yes, lets! The US has 2m people behind bars, approximately half for minor drug offenses. That one million extra prisoners is an equivalent loss-of-life to 20,000 casualties each year. And also generates terror.
AC wrote: Try telling that to the relatives of those who died in London and New York.
Why? How would it help them? Or are you merely trying to make a rhetorical point out of their suffering? Wrong: you cannot speak for them. Some might agree with more policing. Others undoubtedly would not.
My point is the legal system is designed and adapted to do some things. It is not infinitely malleable, capable of doing whatever people want. The legal system has been remarkably successful, so people try to stretch it to cover other things. That undermines the whole system because everything there (including especially civil rights) has strong reason to exist and tweaking it will have large effects. Human systems react with many unforeseen consequences.
How can an arrest be made without a suspected crime? How can there be enough to arrest, but not enough to charge? Charge with whatever caused the arrest! Then argue bail at arraignment. Other charges can certainly be filed later as the investigation proceeds.
Excuse me, but the the police don't have anything stronger than "suspicion", why are they holding anyone at all? If they have something stronger, then why isn't it a search warrent and arrest?
It seems police are actually trying to stop crime. That is not their job, and the legal system isn't suitable for the task. Police are there to deter crime, particularly by punishing wrongdoers.
When they actually try to stop crime before-it-happens, they must inevitably violate civil rights. And often incorrectly and by mistake. The result is not only a loss of civil rights, but some inevitable abuses that have a chilling effect on economic development.
Well, in theory perhaps the FSF holds copyright on all GPL versions, and anything incorporating it's clauses might be a derivative work. However, once accepted into evidence in a court case, it becomes public domain.
Slashdot Mirror
I have a lot of trouble believing that global warming (however caused) will _decrease_ ocean currents. I would expect it to do precisely the opposite, increase them, as driving forces (temperature differences) increase. Or does someone have data that global warming is more at the poles than at the equator?
I'm also extremely leery of Campaign Finance "Reform". I'm afraid individual representatives and senators will lose power (funding) and become more whippable by their parties. I'd much rather the occasional corrupt congresscritter than bloc voting and potentially corrupt parties.
As for low voting, the system makes it so. The Electoral College, incumbency and gerrymandering reduce the utility of voting except in swing areas. Plus the remarkably close actual actions of the parties.
I'd much rather deal with 'blog who make no pretense. I'll do my own fact checking rather than rely on unseen gnomes to do it to my satisfaction.
Second, conspiracy theorists assume motivations to fit their worldview. In most cases, their adversaries have no interest in them (assuming it is the egotism). In this case, it assumes telcos are competant and visionary. Neither has been much in evidence. Telcos shovel bits, and do that reasonably well. None has the slightest clue about content. Telcos will push their bit shovelling any way they can. Proprietary content is a dead-end -- look at AOL.
Cdn law is different from US law in a number of important instiutional details. The judge can and will award costs. Even if the company is technically correct, it could still wind up paying the defense costs. Automagically if the defendant pays a nominal sum "into court" and the award is less than this.
No, you convert in one place only.
The real screwy number is Proc creation. I haven't timed recently, lbut I'd expect vfork() or exec() from RAM buffers to take
Yes, central DC is attractive from a number of viewpoints: easier redundancy, higher efficiency, integratable into UPS and perhaps most important these days -- removing headload from CPU bays. But you're gonna need big busbars, especially if your boards need 3.3V. I can't see using some sort of non-custom miniPSUs to do12VDC to ATX.
As for the Nazis, of course they were often evil people doing horrible things. Particularly around their internment program and The Final Solution But did they never do anything good? Did Allies never do anything wrong? Prewar vilification of "The Huns", the Hunger Blockade? Versailles, Dresden? Critical examination can always be dismissed as apology, or confounded with advocacy. Particularly by those with no refutation.
I'm well familiar with the French, both their dry humor and cynical view of govt. Freedom fries are also a joke in the US outside the Beltway.
It is very unclear, and this FUD is the real and desired effect of censorship. Prior restraint.
Westchester County might well pass a law forbidding wardriving and have some hope of it surviving challenge. Written against providers is far weaker legally, but might be easier to enforce. But when it is, it might not survive a determined challenge. They're probably counting on a lack of determination. But they're forgetting the EFF, who will probably salivate at such a case.
The Internet is highly stratified. That one of it's strongest attractions, to allow dilut interests to assemble and give them forum.
Yes, lets! The US has 2m people behind bars, approximately half for minor drug offenses. That one million extra prisoners is an equivalent loss-of-life to 20,000 casualties each year. And also generates terror.
Why? How would it help them? Or are you merely trying to make a rhetorical point out of their suffering? Wrong: you cannot speak for them. Some might agree with more policing. Others undoubtedly would not.
My point is the legal system is designed and adapted to do some things. It is not infinitely malleable, capable of doing whatever people want. The legal system has been remarkably successful, so people try to stretch it to cover other things. That undermines the whole system because everything there (including especially civil rights) has strong reason to exist and tweaking it will have large effects. Human systems react with many unforeseen consequences.
It seems police are actually trying to stop crime. That is not their job, and the legal system isn't suitable for the task. Police are there to deter crime, particularly by punishing wrongdoers.
When they actually try to stop crime before-it-happens, they must inevitably violate civil rights. And often incorrectly and by mistake. The result is not only a loss of civil rights, but some inevitable abuses that have a chilling effect on economic development.