Any 2-frequency receiver will. However, you really have to pay for it. Try Trimble. They make some of the world's most accurate receivers (if you saw that Everest movie made by OmniMax, the GPS receiver they were using to measure Everest's height was a top-of-the-line Trimble). They generally cost in excess of $10000, with an additional $700+ for the antenna.
Yep, but he was right about needing the 4th satellite for altitude. There are initially 3 variables (lat, long and time) and then if another SV is available you can solve for altitude. I've heard that a military receiver can get a ballpark estimate of its position with just 2 SVs, but it is a very rough estimate (on the order of miles I think) by making a rough estimate for the receiver's clock error and with the user setting the altitude.
My original comment was to the guy who DID state that religous programming should be eliminated, you disagreed with my rebuttle then I restated my original statement.
Anyways, what you state about the government does not contradict what I said at all (I guess you didn't read my post either). I stated thus "Generally, only laws that are not disapproved by the significant majority of the US may be passed" and I suppose you are somehow not in agreement on this? There are a few instances in the US's history where a law was passed that the great majority of Americans disaproved of, but not many that had great effect. By not passing laws that only a tiny minority of Americans would support hardly constitutes a "tyranny of the majority" and I stand by what I said.
There are MANY non-religous groups both commercial and non-commercial. Religous groups get a tax-break (IRS code) as do non-profit organizations. If you want more favors for athiestic advocacy groups, put your money where your mouth is and lobby for it just like every other organization does. I'm all for open discourse but really get irked when athiests demand that religous programming or religous advocacy should be illegal. While you didn't say that, the other guy I was originally replying to did, and since that was essientally all that I stated at first it seemed reasonable that you agreed with him when you replied to my comment.
Oh, BTW, if you think it's bad being an athiest in this country now, look at any time in the history of the US. There is no time that athiests ever were more free to express their viewpoints without harrasment and the country is generally MUCH less conservative than it used to be. I can't understand why you would be scared of this overall trend. A four-year change of administration does not count as a trend to me (if he gets re-elected, though, I'd agree).
I'll keep this short. Athiests are, admittedly, the small minority in the US. The US is a democracy in which free speech is expressed. Generally, only laws that are not disapproved by the significant majority of the US may be passed. The significant majority of the US are Christians or at least religous and believe that religous speech broadcasted must not be eliminated. So form your own channel and advocate to your heart's content is my advice to you, or move to a like-minded country if it really annoys you that much.
Why on earth would an athiest advocacy group expect the benefits of a religous group? They could only receive those benefits if they admitted that they were, in fact, also a religion which is the last thing any athiest I know would want to do.
Why don't you move to China or N. Korea then? They very rigorously inforce these rules there. Nothing above the state after all, n'est pas? France might be up your alley too, but they aren't quite as disciplined as the other nations yet, but they're getting there.
BTW, if you want to stay in the US (if you're in the US in the first place), you've got a remote; use it for crying out loud!! This is a free country, if you've got some money, you can even start up your own athiest advocacy cabel and/or broadcast channel, do fund raisers, form stupid talk shows and advocate religous intolerance to your heart's content (so long as it isn't blatently hateful speech). Seriously, get a grip. BTW, I'm somewhat of an agnostic and totally disagree with you if it wasn't obvious by now.
Also, have you ever watched early morning CSPAN or CSPAN2? You do know that they start (and broadcast on national TV) each session with a prayer of some sort given by a professional clergy member of some faith, right? Do you think this same group of people would ever pass legislation to outlaw what they (blatently) do every day? I don't think so.
That's kind of silly when you think about how fast you're trying to spin it. The whole point is that the thing will be under tremendous tension, trying to generate 9.8m/s^2 acceleration accross the entire interior of the ring. Such a ring would probably be built under moderate tension, then accelerated to an even greater speed, causing the ring to expand not contract.
Unless you built the ring at an orbit deep within the gravity well of a star, there's no way it would contract. At that point, the acceleration due to the star's gravity would be greater than 9.8m/s^2, pulling anything off of the surface towards it as well, sort of defeating the purpose n'est pas?
Maybe you meant that the ring would be built at an even MORE tremendous tension than it is designed for, but that also seems pretty preposterous to me, even using 100% pure unobtanium. Besides, artificially keeping it at such a high tension would take tremendous energy and make construction even more difficult.
It's time to put up some housing ordinances so MS users aren't allowed to ruin the neighbourhood. High time and beyond.
I have a better suggestion. How about we give people a better education in school about computers, etc.? From what I've heard, they already are giving much more in-depth instruction at many public schools on computer use. This doesn't help out ignorant adults (esp. the ones without kids), but at least the next generation should generally be more competent.
It could be a class along side sex-ed called computer-ed. All they need to teach is:
Use protection! (firewall, software patches, ant-virus software, etc.). You can really fsck yourself up with a computer, esp if you're careless.
Don't believe everything you read on the net or in your e-mail. Even if the e-mail is from a friend, don't automatically click the attachment!!!
Just because a website is using https, that doesn't mean it is legit. If you doubt the website's authenticity, simply check its certificate.
Change your password from time to time and don't use the same one for everything.
Don't leave your home PC connected to broadband 24/7 if you don't have to. (not strictly necessary, but it can help mitigate damage)
Keep an eye on your net usage (if you're on broadband). If you see tons of traffic on your computer unexpectedly, you should probably do a virus update and scan.
Don't ever give away important personal information over a non-secured link (ssn, credit card#, etc.) That includes IM, e-mail, blogs, etc. (duh)
Run virus scans on apps you download off the net before running them.
I did say "possible" exception and "may" give... Even with Outlook Express it's trivial to filter out e-mail that starts with ADV and has a valid return address. To me, this is a sign that whoever is sending the spam is at least making the effort to not break the law and make it easy for people to simply ignore it. If the spam is from bzboyz.com then it's still going to get nuked, but if it is from AT&T wireless, then I "might" not hold it against them if it were to happen once or twice in a year.
I understand your curiosity, but why would you want to pay $80 per month to play deathmatch games on-the-go? Playing Unreal Tournament on a crowded subway w/ everyone gawking at me isn't my idea of fun. That's what net cafes are for.
That's correct. I'm in the process of switching to "naked" DSL. As an additional bonus, MSN won't be my ISP, now Qwest will handle everything. Their new modems are pretty slick too, they now (finally) have built-in routers and only cost $60 (or rent for $3/month).
As a matter of fact, I don't. However, they claim to have built-in surge supressors of some form. I can only hope they are telling the truth. If you doubt their truthfulness, you could always buy a whole-house surge protector. They're much more effective against lightning anyways.
The judge said "How do I know you're not just making that up?"
She could have proved it to the judge by dragging in some computer, deleting some files, and then showing how she could retrieve the "deleted" files again. It sounds like the judge should have recused himself from the case given his total lack of expertise in computer technology (any technogology?).
Maybe I was thinking funding. Is that it? (that is the amount of funding for the park services is really low) I have family in Cinci and they were complaining about something along those lines a while back.
Yes, it would. I have powerline ethernet at home and can't plug the bridge into anything other than a wall outlet. Splitters and UPS devices filter out the high frequency data stream.
I guess that would be nefarious, not famous. Doesn't Cinci have one of the least amount of parkland per capita out of any US city? Also, haven't they been plauged with scandels over the years?
I'm not sure if it is the best, but Aglamesis really does have great, old-fashioned ice cream. I haven't been to Cinci in a while, but that ice cream really is memorable, although I miss Skyline and that other chilli restaurant even more.
Agreed. Even if both rovers found evidence of saltwater in their local areas, it still wouldn't be conclusive that a single ocean covered both sites at the same time. Maybe they lied about purchasing an insurance policy? There really was/is zero chance that the rovers could find the evidence needed for this contest.
Can you imagine how bad it would have been to be on Apollo 13 when one of the astronauts got sick all over the place? Sitting in a small, air-tight container for half a week filled with the pungent odors of vomit and diarrea just isn't my idea of a good time.
I think it was harder in the 60s to transfer funds electronically. Nowadays, there really is never a reason to carry around huge amounts of cash for legal purposes. You would simply use a credit card most of the time (to buy a huge TV for instance) or use checks.
He meant from a deprication point of view. Usually, your house's value will go up over four years, whereas your brand new Lexus will drop in value rapidly. If you want to retire early then it may be worth your while to invest wisely rather than burn through your money.
Do they just pick on the tourists, then? I've been to NYC twice now and went on a "reckless" ride on a cab once on each trip. On the first, when I was around 12, I went on one of what I considered one of the "funnest" rides of my life. Needless to say, my grandparents who rode with me didn't find it as much fun and didn't take any more taxi rides on that trip. On my recent trip, the cabbi nearly drove us right into a bus who was changing into our lane (we were doing about 20 over the speed-limit and essentially forced the bus -- which was already partway into our lane -- to go back into its original lane). The bus driver thought it was pretty reckless as well and let the cabbi know as much using typical New Yorker lingo (honking, etc.). I have never seen such reckless cab drivers in any other city in the US (seriously).
Slashdot Mirror
Any 2-frequency receiver will. However, you really have to pay for it. Try Trimble. They make some of the world's most accurate receivers (if you saw that Everest movie made by OmniMax, the GPS receiver they were using to measure Everest's height was a top-of-the-line Trimble). They generally cost in excess of $10000, with an additional $700+ for the antenna.
Yep, but he was right about needing the 4th satellite for altitude. There are initially 3 variables (lat, long and time) and then if another SV is available you can solve for altitude. I've heard that a military receiver can get a ballpark estimate of its position with just 2 SVs, but it is a very rough estimate (on the order of miles I think) by making a rough estimate for the receiver's clock error and with the user setting the altitude.
Anyways, what you state about the government does not contradict what I said at all (I guess you didn't read my post either). I stated thus "Generally, only laws that are not disapproved by the significant majority of the US may be passed" and I suppose you are somehow not in agreement on this? There are a few instances in the US's history where a law was passed that the great majority of Americans disaproved of, but not many that had great effect. By not passing laws that only a tiny minority of Americans would support hardly constitutes a "tyranny of the majority" and I stand by what I said.
There are MANY non-religous groups both commercial and non-commercial. Religous groups get a tax-break (IRS code) as do non-profit organizations. If you want more favors for athiestic advocacy groups, put your money where your mouth is and lobby for it just like every other organization does. I'm all for open discourse but really get irked when athiests demand that religous programming or religous advocacy should be illegal. While you didn't say that, the other guy I was originally replying to did, and since that was essientally all that I stated at first it seemed reasonable that you agreed with him when you replied to my comment.
Oh, BTW, if you think it's bad being an athiest in this country now, look at any time in the history of the US. There is no time that athiests ever were more free to express their viewpoints without harrasment and the country is generally MUCH less conservative than it used to be. I can't understand why you would be scared of this overall trend. A four-year change of administration does not count as a trend to me (if he gets re-elected, though, I'd agree).
Why on earth would an athiest advocacy group expect the benefits of a religous group? They could only receive those benefits if they admitted that they were, in fact, also a religion which is the last thing any athiest I know would want to do.
BTW, if you want to stay in the US (if you're in the US in the first place), you've got a remote; use it for crying out loud!! This is a free country, if you've got some money, you can even start up your own athiest advocacy cabel and/or broadcast channel, do fund raisers, form stupid talk shows and advocate religous intolerance to your heart's content (so long as it isn't blatently hateful speech). Seriously, get a grip. BTW, I'm somewhat of an agnostic and totally disagree with you if it wasn't obvious by now.
Also, have you ever watched early morning CSPAN or CSPAN2? You do know that they start (and broadcast on national TV) each session with a prayer of some sort given by a professional clergy member of some faith, right? Do you think this same group of people would ever pass legislation to outlaw what they (blatently) do every day? I don't think so.
Unless you built the ring at an orbit deep within the gravity well of a star, there's no way it would contract. At that point, the acceleration due to the star's gravity would be greater than 9.8m/s^2, pulling anything off of the surface towards it as well, sort of defeating the purpose n'est pas?
Maybe you meant that the ring would be built at an even MORE tremendous tension than it is designed for, but that also seems pretty preposterous to me, even using 100% pure unobtanium. Besides, artificially keeping it at such a high tension would take tremendous energy and make construction even more difficult.
I have a better suggestion. How about we give people a better education in school about computers, etc.? From what I've heard, they already are giving much more in-depth instruction at many public schools on computer use. This doesn't help out ignorant adults (esp. the ones without kids), but at least the next generation should generally be more competent.
It could be a class along side sex-ed called computer-ed. All they need to teach is:
I did say "possible" exception and "may" give... Even with Outlook Express it's trivial to filter out e-mail that starts with ADV and has a valid return address. To me, this is a sign that whoever is sending the spam is at least making the effort to not break the law and make it easy for people to simply ignore it. If the spam is from bzboyz.com then it's still going to get nuked, but if it is from AT&T wireless, then I "might" not hold it against them if it were to happen once or twice in a year.
I understand your curiosity, but why would you want to pay $80 per month to play deathmatch games on-the-go? Playing Unreal Tournament on a crowded subway w/ everyone gawking at me isn't my idea of fun. That's what net cafes are for.
That's correct. I'm in the process of switching to "naked" DSL. As an additional bonus, MSN won't be my ISP, now Qwest will handle everything. Their new modems are pretty slick too, they now (finally) have built-in routers and only cost $60 (or rent for $3 /month).
I'll make one exception: if they add the "ADV: " to the subject line, then I may give them the benefit of the doubt.
AFAIK, they are semi-autonomous in that they can navigate over and around obstacles from point A to point B without being explicitly told to do so.
You could also write an octave/matlab script. Don't know about you, but octave loads pretty fast for me.
As a matter of fact, I don't. However, they claim to have built-in surge supressors of some form. I can only hope they are telling the truth. If you doubt their truthfulness, you could always buy a whole-house surge protector. They're much more effective against lightning anyways.
Then what are they running?
She could have proved it to the judge by dragging in some computer, deleting some files, and then showing how she could retrieve the "deleted" files again. It sounds like the judge should have recused himself from the case given his total lack of expertise in computer technology (any technogology?).
Maybe I was thinking funding. Is that it? (that is the amount of funding for the park services is really low) I have family in Cinci and they were complaining about something along those lines a while back.
Yes, it would. I have powerline ethernet at home and can't plug the bridge into anything other than a wall outlet. Splitters and UPS devices filter out the high frequency data stream.
I guess that would be nefarious, not famous. Doesn't Cinci have one of the least amount of parkland per capita out of any US city? Also, haven't they been plauged with scandels over the years?
I'm not sure if it is the best, but Aglamesis really does have great, old-fashioned ice cream. I haven't been to Cinci in a while, but that ice cream really is memorable, although I miss Skyline and that other chilli restaurant even more.
Agreed. Even if both rovers found evidence of saltwater in their local areas, it still wouldn't be conclusive that a single ocean covered both sites at the same time. Maybe they lied about purchasing an insurance policy? There really was/is zero chance that the rovers could find the evidence needed for this contest.
Can you imagine how bad it would have been to be on Apollo 13 when one of the astronauts got sick all over the place? Sitting in a small, air-tight container for half a week filled with the pungent odors of vomit and diarrea just isn't my idea of a good time.
I think it was harder in the 60s to transfer funds electronically. Nowadays, there really is never a reason to carry around huge amounts of cash for legal purposes. You would simply use a credit card most of the time (to buy a huge TV for instance) or use checks.
He meant from a deprication point of view. Usually, your house's value will go up over four years, whereas your brand new Lexus will drop in value rapidly. If you want to retire early then it may be worth your while to invest wisely rather than burn through your money.
Do they just pick on the tourists, then? I've been to NYC twice now and went on a "reckless" ride on a cab once on each trip. On the first, when I was around 12, I went on one of what I considered one of the "funnest" rides of my life. Needless to say, my grandparents who rode with me didn't find it as much fun and didn't take any more taxi rides on that trip. On my recent trip, the cabbi nearly drove us right into a bus who was changing into our lane (we were doing about 20 over the speed-limit and essentially forced the bus -- which was already partway into our lane -- to go back into its original lane). The bus driver thought it was pretty reckless as well and let the cabbi know as much using typical New Yorker lingo (honking, etc.). I have never seen such reckless cab drivers in any other city in the US (seriously).