Do you shoot the rifles inside the secure office area? No? Do you carry the drives outside of the building and shoot them in a less secure area of your campus? No? Do you take them off site and shoot them at a range somewhere? Yes?
It gets confusing at times when for example the distance you drive in a car is measured in miles, fuel for it is sold in litres, and fuel efficiency is either miles per gallon or litres per 100km. We really need a miles per litre measure, but I guess that isn't going to happen.
Please no. =p First off, gallons per 100 miles is a much, much better metric than miles per gallon anyway, because the numbers get skewed much less on high mileage cars.
When the mileage calculations were redone a few years ago, a car that was 60 miles per gallon might have been recalculated to be just 50 miles per gallon. A car that previously was calculated at 18 miles per gallon was recalculated to be 16 MPG.
That makes it look like high-mileage cards are overrated and overhyped, right, while normal cars are more realistic. And yet, looking at the same numbers in terms of gallons per 100 miles, you get: "green" car: 1.66 g/100mi becomes 2.0 g/100mi "other" car: 5.55 g/100mi becomes 6.25 g/100mi
Looking at it this way, it's clear that the change affected the "other" car more, in that the increase in gas required per mile driven is actually worse going from 18 to 16 MPG (5.55 to 6.25 g/100mi) than it is from 60 to 50 MPG (1.66 to 2.0 g/100mi).
Second, just don't mix units from the two systems. That makes thing even worse. If anything, spend the money and start adding km markers on roads along side the mile markers. That will do more to ease the transition that anything else.
The nation can't afford to fund every experimental or crazy expensive treatment for everyone - we'd go broke. It's a noble goal but just not possible.
Instead, I see this as an opportunity for private insurance to thrive. I welcome government insurance as it will allow me to disconnect my health care from my employer. But I see an opportunity for a private company to offer supplemental insurance. With no preexisting conditions and, say, $20 a month, you could be covered up to $500,000 for experimental surgeries, out-of-country treatment, or other options for things not covered by your government plan. It lets the rich folks spend their extra money on something.
And the government can continue to fund research studies, like they probably did this one, so that those too poor or without supplemental insurance have a chance to participate. It's a win-win situation.
They aren't that stupid. Most officials recognize that people like to view major equipment like this.
The restriction of non-travelers in airports has made it difficult to spend time watching airplanes land and take off. Rather than ignore this, airports (like DFW) have been adding viewing decks available to those outside security. You may have to watch through glass or through a screen fence, but you'll be able to sit and enjoy your pasttime.
If they do it for airplanes, they'll do it for rockets and spaceships.
The problem with your analogy is that the damages suffered by the victim, in this case, are nonexistent. You can use any analogies that involve theft of a physical thing (computer OR money) because none of them apply at all.
If I take a picture of your computer, then burn my picture, it is irrelevant if the act of burning my picture reduces the damages caused by my picture, because those damages are nil.
I pay 28% tax on the top bit of my income, but pay less - 25%, 22%, on down - for the rest of it.
My taxes really aren't sky high. They're perfectly reasonable. And I'd be happy to pay more "taxes" if it meant my health care wasn't tied to my employer, in lieu of the pseudo-taxes I pay in health care costs now.
And to be fully fair, some downloaded movies result in the same person seeing the movie in the theater ("It was so good I had to see it on a big screen.") or buying the DVD ("I never would have paid to see that based on the previews, but after downloading it I fell in love and bought the DVD for the extras.").
No, neither of those are tremendously likely, but just like some downloaded movies cost revenue and some downloaded movies have no effect on revenue, some downloaded movies add revenue.
I think the third category is much larger for music, because I think people are more likely to sample free music then want to buy it, rather than sample free films then want to buy them for later.
Roads are a service, and are also central to security/defense (actual, real roles for the government).
So the government should own and operate all power generation and transportation facilities, and the internet infrastructure, by your own reasoning. Those are also services that have national defense/security implications.
And I'd readily lump energy storage in with generation and transportation.
Guess the Cap and Trade is the secret weapon for the Volt, the national power grid couldn't handle that type of additional load of Volts being plugged in unless the demand for power dropped by equal amount because people can't their power bills.
Read? Pay? Eat? Fondle?
The power grid has baseline generation, and then supplemental generation. Increasing off-peak usage might cause some supplemental generators to remain on all night, sure. But with a more balanced day/night load, it would make more sense to bring online more baseline generation, which in general is more energy efficient and cleaner, too.
And if the grid can handle mid-day August, it can handle charging Volts at night. I'd have no problem requiring houses with car power stations to be Smart Grid capable, so their use can be cycled off in the rare case that too many people try to recharge their cars in the afternoon.
By your logic using any bandwidth harms by neighbor's bandwidth, and thus any internet use is unethical. That argument is on its face nonsense, and thus your reasoning is as well.
It was unethical for the ISP to oversubscribe their lines. I do not know if my neighbors have internet access from the same ISP or not; it is not unethical in and of itself to use a product I've purchased. How I'm using it (in this case, meaning the content I send or receive) might matter, but merely using the bandwidth does not.
Yeah, unfortunately our three branches system lacks an entity charged with removing laws with no effect.
The courts won't do it. Congress doesn't care. The executive likes them because they can threaten people with them, or ruin someone's life with them, then drop the case before it gets to the court and is thrown out.
A fourth body, who job it was to review all laws, and propose a list each year (based on criteria like "law on the books for a decade with no convictions based on it" or similar) that would be automatically stripped from US code unless congress and the president specifically re-approved and re-signed them.
That should be one of congress's jobs, but they have no interest in spending time on "old business".
Re:The Mysterious Reoccurrence of Mr. Freckles
on
Most Blogs Now Abandoned
·
· Score: 0, Offtopic
He needs three computers: 1. One with the security software installed, which he can use as a proxy. He has to carry this one around with him. 2. One at a remote site with a VPN. 3. The computer he actually uses, which he also must carry.
Connect the computer he actually uses via hard wire, bluetooth, etc., to the proxy machine. Connect to the campus network using the proxy machine. It has the client software, but it has nothing else on it to protect his privacy. Then, VPN from his machine, through the proxy, to the remote server.
If he can install their client software in a virtual machine on his computer, and then route internet access on that machine through the VM, it could save lugging around a second computer.
Or he could tether to a phone. I'm certain he could get a data plan for an iPhone or similar and take his access that way.
I'm in the US and a man suddenly jumps-out and demands all my money, or he'll shoot me. Am I allowed to carry a bomb belt set to detonate if my heart stops and kill the murderer?
If the answer is "no" then you are not truly free. Ownership of your own body is the first right. Self-defense of that body is the second. To be secure in your papers, home, and car from random unwarranted searches is the third.
I'm pretty sure Verizon, Time Warner, AT&T, Comcast, Cablevision, Cox, Suddenlink, just to name a few ISPs, aren't directly involved in any illegal activities on their network.
Except spying on their customers for the government... though I guess that's not illegal any more.
Hrmpf. VHDL different than a programming language? It's a programming language. The kind that does its best to drive you into insanity by requiring to litter your code over and over with typecasts no matter if you know what you are doing.
VHDL is a hardware description language. It's not programming, and thinking of it as such is what makes programmers (like you, I assume) struggle with it.
With regard to type casting, you know that with strict type definitions you can define your own overloaded functions, right? If you hate casting your enumerated type into std_logic_vector everywhere, for example, you can write functions in a package to define "=" and "=" and "and" and "or" as you wish, then write your code to be clear and readable.
Slashdot Mirror
Do you shoot the rifles inside the secure office area? No? Do you carry the drives outside of the building and shoot them in a less secure area of your campus? No? Do you take them off site and shoot them at a range somewhere? Yes?
You're not as secure as you think.
It gets confusing at times when for example the distance you drive in a car is measured in miles, fuel for it is sold in litres, and fuel efficiency is either miles per gallon or litres per 100km. We really need a miles per litre measure, but I guess that isn't going to happen.
Please no. =p First off, gallons per 100 miles is a much, much better metric than miles per gallon anyway, because the numbers get skewed much less on high mileage cars.
When the mileage calculations were redone a few years ago, a car that was 60 miles per gallon might have been recalculated to be just 50 miles per gallon. A car that previously was calculated at 18 miles per gallon was recalculated to be 16 MPG.
That makes it look like high-mileage cards are overrated and overhyped, right, while normal cars are more realistic. And yet, looking at the same numbers in terms of gallons per 100 miles, you get:
"green" car: 1.66 g/100mi becomes 2.0 g/100mi
"other" car: 5.55 g/100mi becomes 6.25 g/100mi
Looking at it this way, it's clear that the change affected the "other" car more, in that the increase in gas required per mile driven is actually worse going from 18 to 16 MPG (5.55 to 6.25 g/100mi) than it is from 60 to 50 MPG (1.66 to 2.0 g/100mi).
Second, just don't mix units from the two systems. That makes thing even worse. If anything, spend the money and start adding km markers on roads along side the mile markers. That will do more to ease the transition that anything else.
Is that why Top Gear reviews all the cars in terms of miles per hour and horsepowers?
The nation can't afford to fund every experimental or crazy expensive treatment for everyone - we'd go broke. It's a noble goal but just not possible.
Instead, I see this as an opportunity for private insurance to thrive. I welcome government insurance as it will allow me to disconnect my health care from my employer. But I see an opportunity for a private company to offer supplemental insurance. With no preexisting conditions and, say, $20 a month, you could be covered up to $500,000 for experimental surgeries, out-of-country treatment, or other options for things not covered by your government plan. It lets the rich folks spend their extra money on something.
And the government can continue to fund research studies, like they probably did this one, so that those too poor or without supplemental insurance have a chance to participate. It's a win-win situation.
They aren't that stupid. Most officials recognize that people like to view major equipment like this.
The restriction of non-travelers in airports has made it difficult to spend time watching airplanes land and take off. Rather than ignore this, airports (like DFW) have been adding viewing decks available to those outside security. You may have to watch through glass or through a screen fence, but you'll be able to sit and enjoy your pasttime.
If they do it for airplanes, they'll do it for rockets and spaceships.
The problem with your analogy is that the damages suffered by the victim, in this case, are nonexistent. You can use any analogies that involve theft of a physical thing (computer OR money) because none of them apply at all.
If I take a picture of your computer, then burn my picture, it is irrelevant if the act of burning my picture reduces the damages caused by my picture, because those damages are nil.
Microsoft should be the Daleks, because Steve can be Davros. After all, they are both closely associated with their chair...
When the trees are in the pocket park across the street, that urban home is extremely hip and extremely valuable.
As opposed to just leaving the building abandoned until someone torches it?
The amusing part is that, on my screen, your post looks exactly as you describe.
I've found the problem goes away if I increase the window width sufficiently.
I'm running Firefox 3.0.11 on Windows XP, but I see the same problem on Firefox 3.0.? on MacOS Leopard at home.
But if you photocopy $1000, leaving the original money right where it was, then burn the copy, the damages suffered by the victim are close to nil...
I pay 28% tax on the top bit of my income, but pay less - 25%, 22%, on down - for the rest of it.
My taxes really aren't sky high. They're perfectly reasonable. And I'd be happy to pay more "taxes" if it meant my health care wasn't tied to my employer, in lieu of the pseudo-taxes I pay in health care costs now.
And to be fully fair, some downloaded movies result in the same person seeing the movie in the theater ("It was so good I had to see it on a big screen.") or buying the DVD ("I never would have paid to see that based on the previews, but after downloading it I fell in love and bought the DVD for the extras.").
No, neither of those are tremendously likely, but just like some downloaded movies cost revenue and some downloaded movies have no effect on revenue, some downloaded movies add revenue.
I think the third category is much larger for music, because I think people are more likely to sample free music then want to buy it, rather than sample free films then want to buy them for later.
Roads are a service, and are also central to security/defense (actual, real roles for the government).
So the government should own and operate all power generation and transportation facilities, and the internet infrastructure, by your own reasoning. Those are also services that have national defense/security implications.
And I'd readily lump energy storage in with generation and transportation.
Yes?
My wife is a fan of Livelink, which she implemented for document and workflow management at her last job.
Guess the Cap and Trade is the secret weapon for the Volt, the national power grid couldn't handle that type of additional load of Volts being plugged in unless the demand for power dropped by equal amount because people can't their power bills.
Read?
Pay?
Eat?
Fondle?
The power grid has baseline generation, and then supplemental generation. Increasing off-peak usage might cause some supplemental generators to remain on all night, sure. But with a more balanced day/night load, it would make more sense to bring online more baseline generation, which in general is more energy efficient and cleaner, too.
And if the grid can handle mid-day August, it can handle charging Volts at night. I'd have no problem requiring houses with car power stations to be Smart Grid capable, so their use can be cycled off in the rare case that too many people try to recharge their cars in the afternoon.
By your logic using any bandwidth harms by neighbor's bandwidth, and thus any internet use is unethical. That argument is on its face nonsense, and thus your reasoning is as well.
It was unethical for the ISP to oversubscribe their lines. I do not know if my neighbors have internet access from the same ISP or not; it is not unethical in and of itself to use a product I've purchased. How I'm using it (in this case, meaning the content I send or receive) might matter, but merely using the bandwidth does not.
Yeah, unfortunately our three branches system lacks an entity charged with removing laws with no effect.
The courts won't do it. Congress doesn't care. The executive likes them because they can threaten people with them, or ruin someone's life with them, then drop the case before it gets to the court and is thrown out.
A fourth body, who job it was to review all laws, and propose a list each year (based on criteria like "law on the books for a decade with no convictions based on it" or similar) that would be automatically stripped from US code unless congress and the president specifically re-approved and re-signed them.
That should be one of congress's jobs, but they have no interest in spending time on "old business".
And where's his Geocities page?
He needs three computers:
1. One with the security software installed, which he can use as a proxy. He has to carry this one around with him.
2. One at a remote site with a VPN.
3. The computer he actually uses, which he also must carry.
Connect the computer he actually uses via hard wire, bluetooth, etc., to the proxy machine. Connect to the campus network using the proxy machine. It has the client software, but it has nothing else on it to protect his privacy. Then, VPN from his machine, through the proxy, to the remote server.
If he can install their client software in a virtual machine on his computer, and then route internet access on that machine through the VM, it could save lugging around a second computer.
Or he could tether to a phone. I'm certain he could get a data plan for an iPhone or similar and take his access that way.
I'm in the US and a man suddenly jumps-out and demands all my money, or he'll shoot me. Am I allowed to carry a bomb belt set to detonate if my heart stops and kill the murderer?
If the answer is "no" then you are not truly free. Ownership of your own body is the first right. Self-defense of that body is the second. To be secure in your papers, home, and car from random unwarranted searches is the third.
I'm pretty sure Verizon, Time Warner, AT&T, Comcast, Cablevision, Cox, Suddenlink, just to name a few ISPs, aren't directly involved in any illegal activities on their network.
Except spying on their customers for the government... though I guess that's not illegal any more.
The first "=" was supposed to have a less-than sign in front of it, for signal assignment. Silly slashcode.
Hrmpf. VHDL different than a programming language? It's a programming language. The kind that does its best to drive you into insanity by requiring to litter your code over and over with typecasts no matter if you know what you are doing.
VHDL is a hardware description language. It's not programming, and thinking of it as such is what makes programmers (like you, I assume) struggle with it.
With regard to type casting, you know that with strict type definitions you can define your own overloaded functions, right? If you hate casting your enumerated type into std_logic_vector everywhere, for example, you can write functions in a package to define "=" and "=" and "and" and "or" as you wish, then write your code to be clear and readable.