It takes time to get to the US Supreme Court. In the meanwhile, putting a large number of TSA agents in a nasty state jail and publicizing it will go a long way toward generating better behavior.
There have been incidents where people have refused to cooperate, and they've been treated viciously. You haven't been paying attention.
Most people just want to get where they're going, and their responsibilities (to their family and their employer) don't give much range for striking back against the TSA. Those that are willing to stand up for themselves are in most cases wise enough to avoid situations where they have to.
For this abomination to end quickly, there would have to be hundreds of people each week trained in unarmed combat, killing in a single blow the first TSA agent to touch them. That would lead to their own death, or life imprisonment, pretty quickly. There aren't many people willing to do that, and understandably so. We're not the people we were in 1775, more's the shame.
Carlin made a lot of valid points in his life, but his attitude was vicious. In your quote, he's calling the airplane pilot, a highly skilled and very responsible guy who'll be keeping Carlin alive, a "prick". There are myriad valid ways to criticize bad behavior while earning a living as a funny man, and that isn't one of them.
And then let's pretend that there are 10 terrorists that try to get on an airplane each year in the US, which is almost definitely an unrealistically high number.
No it's not, you've qualified your statement inadequately. Terrorists fly in the US frequently, but those who plan to destroy the flight they're on are rare.
Your argument is completely void of validity. One of the biggest complaints against insurance companies is that they refuse to cover even some standard procedures, and controversial ones are frequently rejected out of hand.
The problem is that it is almost impossible to prevent lobbying. Basically, any person in legislative office, any person capable of making executive decisions, and all judges, would have to be isolated from all outside contact during their terms in office. To prevent lobbying, they'd have to work in absence of external contact, including news, during their terms in office. In short, they'd have to work in ignorance. Not a good idea.
For a more practical approach, lobbying should be made physically difficult. Locate Congress in an small guarded isolated community in an inaccessible place like the north coast of Alaska. Move it every year, to places like Mt Whitney and Bikini Island, to prevent the buildup of fixed communities of camp followers.
History, as written by progressives who misrepresent it and the ignorant who don't understand it, confuses the effects of governmental regulation with increasing wealth which make more safety affordable.
Many Republicans, a minority of them, are "progressives".
In contrast, most Democrats are "progressives".
Democrat progressivism dates back far before Teddy Roosevelt; through William Jennings Bryan it has continued unabated to the present day.
Progressivism is a political theory characterized by increasing government power, hatred of the rich, corruption of education and crippling of the individual. It is in essence indistinguishable from socialism, and its actual goal is power.
To make this a little more obvious, consider that a hovering helicopter stays in one column of air, and that column of air is in downward motion caused by the helicopter pushing on it. The helicopter is trying to climb by grabbing air that is falling. As soon as the helicopter moves out of that falling column of air, it's grabbing on to stationary air, which is a lot easier.
When it's near the ground, there can't be any falling column of air because the ground is blocking the airflow.
To answer your question literally, you design it so that at rest, the blades are high enough off the ground that the ground effect is insignificant.
To test that a given helicopter does not rely upon ground effect, insist that it take off from a surface consisting mostly of holes, such as a chain link fence suspended horizontally 100 feet in the air.
Most any piece of line-operated electronic equipment is cheaper on 60 Hz than 50. Energy storage capacitors can be 17% smaller, and so can line-frequency transformers
Because Texas is used as the standard that most states follow, it has become the focal point for every crackpot that wants to push his lies on the whole nation. What we're seeing now is a reaction by religious crackpots against the previous generation of crackpots who had successfully promoted the teaching of socialism and "political correctness". It's a horror that fools and villains are deciding on who gets to teach our children, but the problem is not so much these people as the weak structure that makes it possible for them to be effective. As long as governments run schools, people will try to leverage the stolen money those schools represent to forcefully teach their own views. When you pay for your own teacher yourself, you have a much better chance of getting what you want.
Alas, ending government schooling does not prevent the creation of bogus academies or fools like your example who wrongly think they can home-school their own children. There's no solution that can completely defeat human folly, but we can do a lot better than universal public schooling.
Evolutionary theory has fuck-all to do with abiogenisis. [sic]
That's taking an unnecessarily narrow view of evolution. Just as organisms survive and produce offspring pretty much like themselves, and in some cases produce offspring a bit more successful and complicated than themselves, so there are chemicals that in the right conditions do the same. At some point some of those complicated chemicals pass from the degree of complexity and inactivity that we don't call life, to the level of complexity and activity that we do call life. Q.E.D.
At some point in all knowledge you must reach your base, your axioms. You don't get there and declare, "Well, I'm stumped. I can't prove this, and that's a problem. There must be something wrong here." You've got to step back and ask why you got there in the first place. The answer is that you're trying to live, and live well, and that your tool for doing so is using your mind to organize things in a systematic way, and part of that tool is logic and your axioms. If your tools work well you thrive, and if millions of others use the same tools and thrive, that's a good clue that you're on the right track. Use care and be thorough, that's the best we can do. We're human, and we're using human tools for human goals.
Godel may have shown that that we can't prove the validity of our thinking systems, but any system that IS shown to be inconsistent, to be self-contradictory, should be discarded and never again seriously considered as a valid approach. As we go about our lives, we usually do better by not worrying so much about Godel and pay more attention to Sherlock Holmes and William of Ockham.
Discard the impossible, and whatever remains must be the truth.
It's a good idea to discard the complicated when the simple works.
I am now a resident of the certifiably most insane nation in the world
Sorry, but at least half the nations of Africa have the US beat hands down. Consider a gem such as Robert Mugabe's Zimbabwe, where white farmers were thrown off their farms and replaced with clueless politically-favored blacks. Once a food exporter, Zimbabwe's starving.
Consider any Muslim country that's more interested in destroying Israel and repressing anyone born without a penis than advancing the life of their citizens. Wow, there's a bunch that we could profit by emulating. NOT.
Who would be foolish enough to buy Sanders' folly? The company struggles to make a profit in the shadow of Intel's superior technology. In the US, TI, Micron, Qualcomm and Broadcom are bigger. TI has been in the business before and knows better. The other three don't do the same sort of thing, so it wouldn't be a good match. If a foreign company bought AMD, Intel would feel no (antitrust) compunction against lowering prices to the point that the new owner would lose heaps of money. That leaves PC manufacturers who'd like an in-house CPU supplier. Dell's already denied the rumor, and (in my estimate) HP is deeply in bed with Intel and might have culture clash problems with AMD. Apple doesn't seem like a good fit. I suppose Acer is a possibility.
Although this provides a superior transistor, there is a drawback from the IC designer's standpoint, if the illustrations are accurate. The designer of an IC with planar FETs can control both the width and the length of the active region. With these FinFETs, only the length is under the designer's control. Width is fixed (it's the vertical dimension in the illustrations). The only way to get stronger drive is to parallel transistors, whereas in planar design the transistor is simply made wider.
By having the gate on both big sides of the active region (conventional MOS has the gate on only one big side) the gate control is about twice as effective. The active region can be turned off better, and turned on harder. This means lower power dissipation, other things being equal.
Other things aren't completely equal. The larger gate area means more capacitance, which lowers speed and raises dissipation. That is why they're talking about 37% faster and 50% lower dissipation, instead of (magically) 100% faster and 75% lower dissipation.
Slashdot Mirror
It takes time to get to the US Supreme Court. In the meanwhile, putting a large number of TSA agents in a nasty state jail and publicizing it will go a long way toward generating better behavior.
There have been incidents where people have refused to cooperate, and they've been treated viciously. You haven't been paying attention.
Most people just want to get where they're going, and their responsibilities (to their family and their employer) don't give much range for striking back against the TSA. Those that are willing to stand up for themselves are in most cases wise enough to avoid situations where they have to.
For this abomination to end quickly, there would have to be hundreds of people each week trained in unarmed combat, killing in a single blow the first TSA agent to touch them. That would lead to their own death, or life imprisonment, pretty quickly. There aren't many people willing to do that, and understandably so. We're not the people we were in 1775, more's the shame.
Carlin made a lot of valid points in his life, but his attitude was vicious. In your quote, he's calling the airplane pilot, a highly skilled and very responsible guy who'll be keeping Carlin alive, a "prick". There are myriad valid ways to criticize bad behavior while earning a living as a funny man, and that isn't one of them.
No it's not, you've qualified your statement inadequately. Terrorists fly in the US frequently, but those who plan to destroy the flight they're on are rare.
Yep, nothing like keeping people alive and providing them with a way to earn a living, to identify evil.
Government corruption is impossible in the absence of government.
providing an undeserved income at my expense for a self-righteous and corrupt government bureaucrat.
Guess which one I like.
Your argument is completely void of validity. One of the biggest complaints against insurance companies is that they refuse to cover even some standard procedures, and controversial ones are frequently rejected out of hand.
The problem is that it is almost impossible to prevent lobbying. Basically, any person in legislative office, any person capable of making executive decisions, and all judges, would have to be isolated from all outside contact during their terms in office. To prevent lobbying, they'd have to work in absence of external contact, including news, during their terms in office. In short, they'd have to work in ignorance. Not a good idea.
For a more practical approach, lobbying should be made physically difficult. Locate Congress in an small guarded isolated community in an inaccessible place like the north coast of Alaska. Move it every year, to places like Mt Whitney and Bikini Island, to prevent the buildup of fixed communities of camp followers.
History, as written by progressives who misrepresent it and the ignorant who don't understand it, confuses the effects of governmental regulation with increasing wealth which make more safety affordable.
Many Republicans, a minority of them, are "progressives".
In contrast, most Democrats are "progressives".
Democrat progressivism dates back far before Teddy Roosevelt; through William Jennings Bryan it has continued unabated to the present day.
Progressivism is a political theory characterized by increasing government power, hatred of the rich, corruption of education and crippling of the individual. It is in essence indistinguishable from socialism, and its actual goal is power.
To make this a little more obvious, consider that a hovering helicopter stays in one column of air, and that column of air is in downward motion caused by the helicopter pushing on it. The helicopter is trying to climb by grabbing air that is falling. As soon as the helicopter moves out of that falling column of air, it's grabbing on to stationary air, which is a lot easier.
When it's near the ground, there can't be any falling column of air because the ground is blocking the airflow.
To answer your question literally, you design it so that at rest, the blades are high enough off the ground that the ground effect is insignificant.
To test that a given helicopter does not rely upon ground effect, insist that it take off from a surface consisting mostly of holes, such as a chain link fence suspended horizontally 100 feet in the air.
Most any piece of line-operated electronic equipment is cheaper on 60 Hz than 50. Energy storage capacitors can be 17% smaller, and so can line-frequency transformers
Because Texas is used as the standard that most states follow, it has become the focal point for every crackpot that wants to push his lies on the whole nation. What we're seeing now is a reaction by religious crackpots against the previous generation of crackpots who had successfully promoted the teaching of socialism and "political correctness". It's a horror that fools and villains are deciding on who gets to teach our children, but the problem is not so much these people as the weak structure that makes it possible for them to be effective. As long as governments run schools, people will try to leverage the stolen money those schools represent to forcefully teach their own views. When you pay for your own teacher yourself, you have a much better chance of getting what you want.
Alas, ending government schooling does not prevent the creation of bogus academies or fools like your example who wrongly think they can home-school their own children. There's no solution that can completely defeat human folly, but we can do a lot better than universal public schooling.
That's taking an unnecessarily narrow view of evolution. Just as organisms survive and produce offspring pretty much like themselves, and in some cases produce offspring a bit more successful and complicated than themselves, so there are chemicals that in the right conditions do the same. At some point some of those complicated chemicals pass from the degree of complexity and inactivity that we don't call life, to the level of complexity and activity that we do call life. Q.E.D.
At some point in all knowledge you must reach your base, your axioms. You don't get there and declare, "Well, I'm stumped. I can't prove this, and that's a problem. There must be something wrong here." You've got to step back and ask why you got there in the first place. The answer is that you're trying to live, and live well, and that your tool for doing so is using your mind to organize things in a systematic way, and part of that tool is logic and your axioms. If your tools work well you thrive, and if millions of others use the same tools and thrive, that's a good clue that you're on the right track. Use care and be thorough, that's the best we can do. We're human, and we're using human tools for human goals.
Godel may have shown that that we can't prove the validity of our thinking systems, but any system that IS shown to be inconsistent, to be self-contradictory, should be discarded and never again seriously considered as a valid approach. As we go about our lives, we usually do better by not worrying so much about Godel and pay more attention to Sherlock Holmes and William of Ockham.
Sorry, but at least half the nations of Africa have the US beat hands down. Consider a gem such as Robert Mugabe's Zimbabwe, where white farmers were thrown off their farms and replaced with clueless politically-favored blacks. Once a food exporter, Zimbabwe's starving.
Consider any Muslim country that's more interested in destroying Israel and repressing anyone born without a penis than advancing the life of their citizens. Wow, there's a bunch that we could profit by emulating. NOT.
Yup, have the government decide who's going to be a priest. That's going to work real well.
"Praise God in the highest, and his only messenger, the president of the United States."
Gee, if went to one of those meetings, I'd BRAG about having lustful thoughts about the opposite sex. You can't shame a person who's earned his pride.
Wide left-right margins. Expanded fonts....2....spaces....between....words.
Who would be foolish enough to buy Sanders' folly? The company struggles to make a profit in the shadow of Intel's superior technology. In the US, TI, Micron, Qualcomm and Broadcom are bigger. TI has been in the business before and knows better. The other three don't do the same sort of thing, so it wouldn't be a good match. If a foreign company bought AMD, Intel would feel no (antitrust) compunction against lowering prices to the point that the new owner would lose heaps of money. That leaves PC manufacturers who'd like an in-house CPU supplier. Dell's already denied the rumor, and (in my estimate) HP is deeply in bed with Intel and might have culture clash problems with AMD. Apple doesn't seem like a good fit. I suppose Acer is a possibility.
Although this provides a superior transistor, there is a drawback from the IC designer's standpoint, if the illustrations are accurate. The designer of an IC with planar FETs can control both the width and the length of the active region. With these FinFETs, only the length is under the designer's control. Width is fixed (it's the vertical dimension in the illustrations). The only way to get stronger drive is to parallel transistors, whereas in planar design the transistor is simply made wider.
The planar process was developed at Fairchild by Jean Hoerni. (wikipedia).
By having the gate on both big sides of the active region (conventional MOS has the gate on only one big side) the gate control is about twice as effective. The active region can be turned off better, and turned on harder. This means lower power dissipation, other things being equal.
Other things aren't completely equal. The larger gate area means more capacitance, which lowers speed and raises dissipation. That is why they're talking about 37% faster and 50% lower dissipation, instead of (magically) 100% faster and 75% lower dissipation.