From your own link, many people who file jointly pay less taxes than filing alone. In certain odd circumstances you can end up paying more if you file jointly, but you have the option of filing separately anyway.
So worst case scenario, you pay the same as single people. Any other scenario, you pay less.
Why? You already get tax breaks. I understand that had a purpose when a wife was a dependent, but why today? Why should the single people pay you to be married, faithfully or not?
I'm sure they've thought of that. This isn't really a new idea, and the use of beamed power engines that switch from using atmosphere to carried fuel isn't new either (you can even use it in Kerbal Space Program with the right mods). The problem is that the molecular mass of air is quite high, and that reduces your specific impulse and thrust for a given power input. So to get the same thrust with air you'd need a bigger transmitter (probably much bigger). With rockets you usually need your highest thrust early on, because you're lifting more fuel, gravity is stronger, and you need to go more or less straight up. Later on you can get by with less thrust. Unfortunately, that's the opposite of what an air/fuel switching beamed power engine provides. You can get around that using a spaceplane design, but you still need to get up to speed and altitude while in range of your ground station... or build more ground stations.
They're probably looking at getting something working first, then building out the infrastructure to do more. That fits in with their plan to make a suborbital ship first: if you go basically straight up you're always in range of a single ground station, but you can't get into orbit.
There was this one pub with a fantastic veggie burger... if you got it with bacon. Other veggie burgers are much less fantastic, even with bacon on them.
Other way around. Electronic payments replace cash and cash is used as a backup for electronic. Most of the western world already works that way. This story is about some places in Europe retiring the cash option entirely for some automated vending machines. But those probably won't work so well with the power out anyway.
This thing's battery life is also specced as "light web browsing." Actually, when they did light web browsing they couldn't get it up to the rated battery life.
If you used it to do actual workstation-y things that would justify that hardware, you get rather less.
An ultra-long run notebook is an interesting idea, but I don't really understand why you'd want a notebook with a gigantic battery and a bunch of high end hardware for doing 3D graphics. Gaming in that coffee shop where you just can't get a plugin? 3D modelling on the beach?
I was searched five times once while changing planes. Two of them were in sight of each other (either end of a hallway). Every time they said it was a "random check."
When I enter the US I generally just raise my hands (that's what the dozen nice men are yelling at me to do) then lie down, hope they know how to not use those guns they're pointing at me, and wait for them to handcuff and carry me off.
No, I'm not kidding. Apparently my name, which is one of the most common in the English world, is shared by someone pretty scary.
My initial reaction was that someone forgot a couple of zeros on that figure. A single airliner costs a few hundred million. If that's the real price it seems like a no brainer to give this thing a try somewhere. Maybe the Japanese will build one.
Non-foiling boats are ploughing through the water. They get a huge benefit by leaving as little of themselves as possible to do that, and fly the rest through the air. A train riding on rails is much more efficient. At high speed, IIRC it's air resistance that limits the speed of both aircraft and land vehicles.
No. Learn what the logical operator implication is.
Correlation is a requirement for a causal relationship. In fact, correlation DOES imply causation, just not simple, direct causation in the direction you find most convenient for your Internet argument.
Yup, the airlines should make people check all their excess crap. If your carryon was inconveniencing you because it wouldn't fit under the seat then I'd be in favour of making you check that too.
If the airlines made people's carryons actually fit in the sizing devices like they're supposed to, it would be better for everyone. Even better would be doing that AND getting rid of the larger bin in that device.
If you can't put a weeks worth of clean shirts, underwear, socks, a couple of pairs of pants, a change of shoes, a tube of pit stick and a toothbrush in a reasonably sized carryon perhaps you should investigate the rolling vs. folding debate. Or type "how to pack a small carryon bag" into Google.
You seem to be referring to the US National Ignition Facility. It was built at very large scale in an attempt to produce net energy positive fusion and also to simulate nuclear weapon implosions.
The Boeing concept is for an engine powered by fission, initiated by neutrons produced by a small fusion reaction. The fusion part is like the spark plug in a car - it doesn't produce significant energy itself, it's just a way to initiate and control the main reaction.
Inertial (laser) confinement fusion works fine on smaller scales as a neutron source. Here's a paper talking about using it for a cheap, bench top neutron source: http://iopscience.iop.org/0029...
Laser initiated fusion works just fine. It's just not net energy positive. But you don't need it to be when you're just using it as a neutron source. The fission reaction it kicks off is enthusiastically energy positive.
So learn to fly with a small, soft duffel bag. You can live out of one of those for a week easily, it's a quarter (or less) than the size of the typical carryon suitcase, and if you stow it under the seat in front it actually makes a nice foot pillow.
It's not that hard. I've been on lots of flights where they brought up a double jetway (fore and aft). You could easily do one on the other side too.
I don't think airlines do it because loading passengers normally isn't a bottleneck. It happens as they shift baggage and refuel. If it really was a bottleneck, they'd just cut the carryon baggage allowance by two thirds and save lots of time. Or have European style boarding lounges where they check your boarding pass when you get to the lounge rather than when you get on the plane and he lounges separate you by boarding group so there's no cheating.
It looks like there's space in front of or behind each pod, like on some trains. Personally, I'd be all in favour of eliminating overhead bins, at least on long flights. That would also eliminate the half hour of boarding time while the flight attendants argue with everyone over whether their ridiculously oversized "carry on" is over the limit, and whether or not it's the airline's responsibility to somehow make more space for it.
Bullshit right back. The concept of spirit of the law has a long history, and is a valuable concept. Much of the interpretation of the US constitution relies heavily on the spirit, rather than the letter, of the law, and the English-derived precedent system owes much of its existence to the dichotomy.
Yes, things are simpler when those line up with each other. I don't think anyone would argue that US tax laws should be adjusted. Nevertheless, it IS rather cheeky of MS to "volunteer" to pay a special tax to support schools when they've dodged paying several orders of magnitude more than that. They have most certainly dodged paying those taxes - they've taken active, in some cases eyerollingly ridiculous, steps to avoid paying them, regardless of whether you feel those actions were justified or not.
Timothy probably did not incorporate himself in a different jurisdiction, then pay his lower-taxed-self, a PO box in the desert, 90% of his salary for "services rendered." He likely DID pay more taxes than are required of him. The majority of people do.
There's the letter, and the spirit of the law. You can technically not break the letter while trampling all over the spirit. In some cases, there are even more gradations. OJ isn't criminally guilty of killing his ex, but he is responsible for it.
Slashdot Mirror
From your own link, many people who file jointly pay less taxes than filing alone. In certain odd circumstances you can end up paying more if you file jointly, but you have the option of filing separately anyway.
So worst case scenario, you pay the same as single people. Any other scenario, you pay less.
Why? You already get tax breaks. I understand that had a purpose when a wife was a dependent, but why today? Why should the single people pay you to be married, faithfully or not?
I'm sure they've thought of that. This isn't really a new idea, and the use of beamed power engines that switch from using atmosphere to carried fuel isn't new either (you can even use it in Kerbal Space Program with the right mods). The problem is that the molecular mass of air is quite high, and that reduces your specific impulse and thrust for a given power input. So to get the same thrust with air you'd need a bigger transmitter (probably much bigger). With rockets you usually need your highest thrust early on, because you're lifting more fuel, gravity is stronger, and you need to go more or less straight up. Later on you can get by with less thrust. Unfortunately, that's the opposite of what an air/fuel switching beamed power engine provides. You can get around that using a spaceplane design, but you still need to get up to speed and altitude while in range of your ground station... or build more ground stations.
They're probably looking at getting something working first, then building out the infrastructure to do more. That fits in with their plan to make a suborbital ship first: if you go basically straight up you're always in range of a single ground station, but you can't get into orbit.
There was this one pub with a fantastic veggie burger... if you got it with bacon. Other veggie burgers are much less fantastic, even with bacon on them.
You just completely baffled all the Americans.
The retailer is on the hook for physical verification of credit cards anyway.
Other way around. Electronic payments replace cash and cash is used as a backup for electronic. Most of the western world already works that way. This story is about some places in Europe retiring the cash option entirely for some automated vending machines. But those probably won't work so well with the power out anyway.
Actually, that is horrible. There's a reason conquering armies used to literally salt the earth if they really hated you. Plus it eats cars.
This thing's battery life is also specced as "light web browsing." Actually, when they did light web browsing they couldn't get it up to the rated battery life.
If you used it to do actual workstation-y things that would justify that hardware, you get rather less.
An ultra-long run notebook is an interesting idea, but I don't really understand why you'd want a notebook with a gigantic battery and a bunch of high end hardware for doing 3D graphics. Gaming in that coffee shop where you just can't get a plugin? 3D modelling on the beach?
I was searched five times once while changing planes. Two of them were in sight of each other (either end of a hallway). Every time they said it was a "random check."
When I enter the US I generally just raise my hands (that's what the dozen nice men are yelling at me to do) then lie down, hope they know how to not use those guns they're pointing at me, and wait for them to handcuff and carry me off.
No, I'm not kidding. Apparently my name, which is one of the most common in the English world, is shared by someone pretty scary.
My initial reaction was that someone forgot a couple of zeros on that figure. A single airliner costs a few hundred million. If that's the real price it seems like a no brainer to give this thing a try somewhere. Maybe the Japanese will build one.
Non-foiling boats are ploughing through the water. They get a huge benefit by leaving as little of themselves as possible to do that, and fly the rest through the air. A train riding on rails is much more efficient. At high speed, IIRC it's air resistance that limits the speed of both aircraft and land vehicles.
No. Learn what the logical operator implication is.
Correlation is a requirement for a causal relationship. In fact, correlation DOES imply causation, just not simple, direct causation in the direction you find most convenient for your Internet argument.
Yup, the airlines should make people check all their excess crap. If your carryon was inconveniencing you because it wouldn't fit under the seat then I'd be in favour of making you check that too.
If the airlines made people's carryons actually fit in the sizing devices like they're supposed to, it would be better for everyone. Even better would be doing that AND getting rid of the larger bin in that device.
If you can't put a weeks worth of clean shirts, underwear, socks, a couple of pairs of pants, a change of shoes, a tube of pit stick and a toothbrush in a reasonably sized carryon perhaps you should investigate the rolling vs. folding debate. Or type "how to pack a small carryon bag" into Google.
PS: sleeping naked is good for you.
You seem to be referring to the US National Ignition Facility. It was built at very large scale in an attempt to produce net energy positive fusion and also to simulate nuclear weapon implosions.
The Boeing concept is for an engine powered by fission, initiated by neutrons produced by a small fusion reaction. The fusion part is like the spark plug in a car - it doesn't produce significant energy itself, it's just a way to initiate and control the main reaction.
Inertial (laser) confinement fusion works fine on smaller scales as a neutron source. Here's a paper talking about using it for a cheap, bench top neutron source: http://iopscience.iop.org/0029...
Laser initiated fusion works just fine. It's just not net energy positive. But you don't need it to be when you're just using it as a neutron source. The fission reaction it kicks off is enthusiastically energy positive.
Width. Your ankles are skinnier than your hips.
So learn to fly with a small, soft duffel bag. You can live out of one of those for a week easily, it's a quarter (or less) than the size of the typical carryon suitcase, and if you stow it under the seat in front it actually makes a nice foot pillow.
It's not that hard. I've been on lots of flights where they brought up a double jetway (fore and aft). You could easily do one on the other side too.
I don't think airlines do it because loading passengers normally isn't a bottleneck. It happens as they shift baggage and refuel. If it really was a bottleneck, they'd just cut the carryon baggage allowance by two thirds and save lots of time. Or have European style boarding lounges where they check your boarding pass when you get to the lounge rather than when you get on the plane and he lounges separate you by boarding group so there's no cheating.
I'd pay extra for that spot.
It looks like there's space in front of or behind each pod, like on some trains. Personally, I'd be all in favour of eliminating overhead bins, at least on long flights. That would also eliminate the half hour of boarding time while the flight attendants argue with everyone over whether their ridiculously oversized "carry on" is over the limit, and whether or not it's the airline's responsibility to somehow make more space for it.
Bullshit right back. The concept of spirit of the law has a long history, and is a valuable concept. Much of the interpretation of the US constitution relies heavily on the spirit, rather than the letter, of the law, and the English-derived precedent system owes much of its existence to the dichotomy.
Yes, things are simpler when those line up with each other. I don't think anyone would argue that US tax laws should be adjusted. Nevertheless, it IS rather cheeky of MS to "volunteer" to pay a special tax to support schools when they've dodged paying several orders of magnitude more than that. They have most certainly dodged paying those taxes - they've taken active, in some cases eyerollingly ridiculous, steps to avoid paying them, regardless of whether you feel those actions were justified or not.
Timothy probably did not incorporate himself in a different jurisdiction, then pay his lower-taxed-self, a PO box in the desert, 90% of his salary for "services rendered." He likely DID pay more taxes than are required of him. The majority of people do.
There's the letter, and the spirit of the law. You can technically not break the letter while trampling all over the spirit. In some cases, there are even more gradations. OJ isn't criminally guilty of killing his ex, but he is responsible for it.