Keeping constant spacing and running at a reasonable speed within a lane may be good. But holding the same speed in adjacent same-direction lanes is very bad.
In driving classes, back in the mid-20th century, we were warned against it. You NEVER were to hold the same speed as a car in an adjacent lane. (About a 5 MPH drift, with leftward lanes faster, was close to ideal.) Judging by the behavior of current drivers on California freeways that lore has apparently been lost.
Some of the issues:
- Adjacent cars form a multi-lane "rolling roadblock". Drivers behind them who wish to travel faster are impeded, collect behind them, and end up "compressed", setting up the conditions for a chain, reaction multicar pileup.
- With an inter-lane drift a driver wishing to pass a slower car soon has an opening to switch lanes and proceed.
- With the slowest lane to the right and increasing speed to the left, merges and exits require less speed change and have better timing margins, long-distance traffic proceeds rapidly with little disturbance, and lane changes are easy. Drivers have the opportunity to rapidly distribute themselves among the lanes and drive at a speed where they're comfortable.
- When driving at the same speed as an adjacent vehicle you increase your risk of collision:
- If you're in a blind spot you STAY in the blind spot for a long time. The window of opportunity for the adjacent driver to happen to make a lane change into you - or into the space immediately in front of you, becomes much larger than if you had a relative drift.
- If you hold relative position the other driver's peripheral-vision motion detector doesn't keep him aware of your presence. After a minute or so you're likely to fall out of his attention. Then, if a sudden traffic situation makes him need to change lanes suddenly (or he just wants to change lanes and forgets to do a recheck), he may swerve into you.
(By the way: The two-way two-lane equivalent of the rolling road-block chain-reaction-collision precursor is the "rat pack", a term of art in traffic engineering. It occurs when the first driver goes slightly over the limit and the second driver won't pass because he doesn't want to risk the necessary speed, but follows too closely for following cars to pass in two single-car hops. Fault is primarily on the second driver.)
Fahrenheit designed his scale in 1724. They weren't salting the roads and nobody was going fast enough or on a smooth enough surface for road salt to matter.
I didn't say it was by design. It's a convenient fallout of the arbitrary choices he made when coming up with a scale for his freshly-invented mercury-in-glass thermometer.
Road salt doesn't reduce that point to 0 F. Yes, but it's close. (The scale was originally designed with ammonium chloride, anyhow.) you can't maintain the salt concentration that high. Not a problem: They distribute gravel-sized chunks of salt, which take a while to dissolve even in running water. These melt randomly located and sized holes in the ice, which gives it a non-smooth texture (for traction) and breaks it up (for plowing aside).
Hyperthermia starts at 104 F which (with a basal metabolisim equivalent to running a minimum of a 75-watt bulb in your guts and head) you reach real-soon-now when the temperature is about 100F and you're dehydrated and the real normal body temperature is 98.6 F No, it's not. That's the typical measurement under the tongue - somewhat cooler than the core of the body, thanks largely to mechanisms to cool the brain. Subtract about a degree (97.6) for axilary (underarm) rather than oral, add about a degree (99.6) for rectal - which still isn't the hottest part of your core.
Yes, they're both approximate, so you have to use care as they're approached, as well as when they're exceeded. But how nice that a round number tags the (even if approximate) transition into unusual danger.
The Dutch have expanded into the ocean and used wind power for quite a while.
They've expanded their country by building dikes, pumping out water using windmill pumps, and reclaiming the seabed.
Building an artificial island and surrounding it with windmills to generate enormous amounts of electrical energy (rather than, say, building nuclear reactors) is right in character. B-)
(Back in the mid 20th century, one of the Lampoon magazines had a joke conspiracy theory article about the Dutch taking over the world by expanding out into the ocean and pushing the water up onto everybody else's country. It somehow involved people in other countries being awakened by the sound of chainsaws, wielded by invading Dutch military squads, being applied to their kitchen doors (to convert them into the two-segment, house-ventilating, "Dutch doors").)
Customary are far more convenient for the tasks they're optimized for.
The Farenhiet scale is another example, where the definitions make the scale a strong mnemonic for certain situations:
* 100 was set as a best guess at the time for the human body's internal temperature. (They got within a fraction of a degree.) When temperatures approach or exceed 100 F, it isn't enough to just relax when you're getting overheated. You must stay hydrated or suffer heat stroke and risk death.
* zero was set at the coldest temperature they could easily and repeatedly generate in a lab: The melting point of pure ice saturated with salt (at sea level pressure, etc.) This is important when driving in states that salt their roads in the winter. When the temperature in degrees F goes negative the salt stops working. Drive VERY carefully or you end up in the ditch, risking death.
Given that those situations are deadly AND rare, it'37.s nice that these easy to remember round numbers flag them. Meanwhile, the boiling and freezing points of water (212F and 32F) are used often enough that they get memorized. With C, 100 and zero are boil and freeze, but will you remember 37.777... and -17.7777 as important numbers for heat stroke and deadly road conditions?
Take an active role in your health care and question why you can't use a generic...
And remember that, for some things, you really shouldn't use the generic - even when the FDA and your insurance company say it's just fine.
For example: Synthroid. This is a drug where:
- the activity level is critical - you're replacing (all or part of) an important signal in a broken (or degraded) feedback loop with a constant output
- but (unlike insulin) the tests are not easy enough to do real-time to recreate the feedback loop - so you take them every few months and adjust accordingly
- being off too far can cause permanent neurological and other damage
- the generic formulations are often far off the claimed dose, degrade at a different rate than the brand-name drug, or (in some cases) appear to be counterfeit with no activity whatsoever
... more importantly, you are guaranteed it will have exactly the amount of niacin it says on the label.
If I have this right:
Actually, you're guaranteed that the company did tests that show that, if it is not beyond the expiration date and hasn't been improperly stored, the drug will have at least 95% of the activity it claims on the label (for the on-label applications).
That's a heck of a lot tighter than OTC vitamins (even absent fraud). But let's be careful about saying "exactly".
(Lots of drugs are still quite potent far beyond their labelled expiration dates, though you don't necessarily know HOW potent. The manufacturing-to-expiration time is often when the company decided the formulation had adequate shelf life and stopped paying for testing, rather than the point where the drug degraded enough that it was close to missing the potency requirements.)
Umm...how do electronics work without metal? Are they using tubes of salt water as conductors instead?
They don't have ENOUGH metal - especially big enough pieces of thick, long, highly-conductive metal, to significantly affect the low, penetrating, radio signals used by the "metal detectors".
A large coin might possibly set one of these detectors off. A piece of electronics the same size or smaller, with plastic case, fiberglass printed circuit board, and fine wires shorter than the circumference of that coin (on the board or even tinier from point to point within the chips) is a much harder to "see" target. If the battery isn't enough to set such a gadget off, the whole phone would be only slightly more "visible".
The metal detector has to be INsensitive enough that it doesn't go off from dental fillings - or it would be going off all the time, and thus be ignored as useless. Make a phone that's a "smaller" target than a mouth full of metal and you can expect it to be missed, too.
One stock device for cardiologists is synthetic-aperture doppler ultrasound sonar imaging
Alias "echocardiogram". I get a couple of these per year just for screening:
- One resting.
- A couple more as a "stress echo" - one just before and one just after a session on a treadmill (or an injection of a drug if my leg joints are acting up) to pump up the heart rate and dilate the vessels.
I also get (using the same or a similar system) occasional measurements of blood flow in various vessels, such as major arteries and veins, especially leg veins (looking for valve failures that might lead to clotting and heart attack) and the first fork of the carotid artery (where atherosclerosis can start up, leading impaired blood flow and brain damage or clotting and stroke).
It's also good for imaging all sorts of soft organs, such as kidneys (looking for things like cysts or cancers), a foetus (looking for prenatal problems), etc.
I'm really curious how you can map a heart without actually touching the endocardium.
Just off the top of my head:
There are a number of non-invasive imaging technologies that can be "strobed" in synchronization with the heart's motion to produce a series of 3-D images which, together, amount to a moving picture of the cyclic activity, complete with various annotation (such as blood velocity maps, electro-chemical activity, etc.).
One stock device for cardiologists is synthetic-aperture doppler ultrasound sonar imaging. A wide hand-held probe, with the junction to the skin joined by a slimy jelly with about the same speed-of-sound as soft tissue, connected to a high-end laptop running appropriate software, can construct such mappings in real-time, in sessions lasting minutes, annotated with blood flow information.
Other possibilities include magnetic resonance imaging (the functional version if you want to visualize the cyclic electrochemical activity) and computer aided tomography scanning.
"but if it's free from the sky how will the rich get richer"
By selling collection systems.
"It's raining soup. So I want to sell buckets."
Back in the late '60s, when I invented (and tried to patent) an improved solar focusing mirror system, I named it "the bucket" in reference to that line.
(Didn't pursue the patent after the search found a portable microwave antenna using the same principle, granted in 1953. When I DID get around to getting a bunch of patents, a couple decades ago, I found out that an initial rejection was almost pro forma, to be followed by an appeal listing why this patent is different from those the examiner thought might be related. Of the eight or so patents I've gotten so far, only ONE was so new and different that it went through without that "Why is it different from all this similar-sounding stuff?" appeal stage.)
It could be worse, if it were intel management engine, it would have an empty root password.
If I recall the reports correctly, the IME didn't have an empty root password. Instead it checked the number of bytes that the code running in the remote browser said were the length of the hashed password - rather than the number of bytes the IME server-side code knew were the length of a hashed password.
So if you entered a zero-length password on the normal web page, you'd fail to log in. But if you hacked up your own version of the page's code that would say the hashed password was zero-length, the IME code would believe it, check zero bytes for match (which always passes), and let you in.
So it didn't get discovered (at least publicly) until a security researcher did that hack and had his WTF moment, years after the broken code was deployed.
What's shocking is the number of people willing to jump on the Trump train and take a bullet for him in hopes of being rewarded. You'd think the pile of bodies you have to climb over to get into Trump's circle would clue you in to your odds of success being poor.
I've been advocated, for years, that the NN issue be pulled from the FCC and dropped in the lap of FTC and DOJ. (I even got a copy of my several-years-old paper on the subject into the hands of an FTC functionary, just after the election last year.)
But I was under the impression that the FTC needed a new congressional authorization to exercise such power.
According to THIS:
- The reason they're currently blocked is that the FCC classed the Internet as a common carrier - and THIS (not the Federal Hands Off the Internet legislation) is what's been holding them off.
- By revoking their claim of jurisdiction (upon which courts have frowned), the FTC is unmuzzled immediately.
I don't see a reference to my paper among the thousands of footnotes. (Fine with me - it was for a composition class, not really for Coming to the Attention of People in High Places (to finish the "live in interesting times" curse). But I could care less if it wasn't what got them going in the right direction (or I didn't get credit if I did have some influence).)
Now to see if this claim on the FCC's part is correct and it works like I hope - and they claim it will. Meanwhile...
It is highly likely that if NK, or anyone else for that matter, launches an ICBM the first one will get through, showing these missile defense systems to be useless.
Also MAKING them useless.
All they need to do is set off a small one (a few kilotons) at the right altitude (which they've already reached - and ORBITED SATELLITES) over the central US, to EMP the whole North American continent.
That's why it doesn't particularly matter that their first fission nukes were pretty puny. Puny fission bombs are good for two things:
1) EMP
2) Igniting NON-puny FUSION bombs.
Well, ideally, we'd expect Congress to do their job and remove them. Or the President to ask them to resign. But our Founding Fathers expected elected officials to act in good faith, not be corrupt, and yet here we are.
Actually, our Founding Fathers expected the central power to tend to attract the corrupt and corrupt any who arrived not yet corrupt.
That's why they split the government into three parts (with any two in combination able to override the third), complicated the procedures, and put lots of roadblocks in the way of doing things: So it would take a bunch of corrupt officials to get away with anything (and others would have some chance of stopping them).
Jefferson thought we'd have to mash a (violent) revolutionary reset button every couple decades, anyhow. But they wrought better than they knew, and their tell-me-three-times redundant system has tended to self correct. It still had a lot of problems, and hurt a lot of people. But (except for the Civil War) it didn't start seriously and persistently going off the rails until about WW I - 14 decades rather than two.
Want to know why we got tTrump? Because a lot of people got sick of the "deep-state" "two-headed singl- party" "swamp" and he was the biggest monkey wrench they could grab to throw into the machine.
Didn't work the way they, or you, wanted it to? So what else is new? Unintended consequences are the nature of government power.
The PATRIOT act is not a law. It is forbidden by the fourth and fifth amendments to the constitution. Any official exercising any of these usurped powers violates their oath.
True.
Unfortunately, until the Supreme Court has ruled that way, it can be used to harm you just as effectively as if it were a law. B-b
On the other hand, it seems like millions of dollars of bitcoins get stolen from fools every few months and no one seems to care, so maybe I'm wrong and the level of "security" seen in the field is exactly right.
The theft of bitcoin from the fools, even if it's eventually spent (no earlier than the owner would have spent it), doesn't negatively affect the other owners of bitcoin. They still have theirs. They might take notice of the thefts and try to keep their bitcoin in a more secure storage, but unless and until THEY're robbed, they still have their currency.
If the stolen bitcoin is lost, the rest of the bitcoin just deflated. So its value went UP. The same is true, to a lesser extent, if the thieves hold onto it for a while while it "cools off" (longer than the owner would have held it) before they spend it.
Tinnitis - ringing in the ears - sometimes (always?) includes a malfunction of a feedback mechanism where an actuator is shaking the ear's innards. You can pick up the "ringing in the ears" with a microphone stuck into the ear.
Perhaps the brain is sending the expectation of a loud sound either to that actuator, or to the one that tightens up the eardrum (reducing the sensitivity) to protect the ear's mechanism from loud noises. Either would produce an actual physical stimulus to the ear's sensors, and either might be detectable by an in-the-ear-canal microphone.
... make a false "death penalty" addendum to their file.
Not in Michigan - the first sovereign state to have a constitutional ban on the death penalty. (Pre-statehood there was this botched execution, which so disgusted the citizenry that they banned 'em.)
Note, though, that Michigan gives real multi-decade prison sentences to murderers. Murder is a young man's crime and by the time they get out they aren't young any more.
As of the last time I knew of the stats (admittedly a couple decades back) there was exactly ONE Michigan convicted murderer, released after completing his sentence, who went on to improperly kill again: He ran a stopsign and squashed a pedestrian.
Slashdot Mirror
Keeping constant spacing and running at a reasonable speed within a lane may be good. But holding the same speed in adjacent same-direction lanes is very bad.
In driving classes, back in the mid-20th century, we were warned against it. You NEVER were to hold the same speed as a car in an adjacent lane. (About a 5 MPH drift, with leftward lanes faster, was close to ideal.) Judging by the behavior of current drivers on California freeways that lore has apparently been lost.
Some of the issues:
- Adjacent cars form a multi-lane "rolling roadblock". Drivers behind them who wish to travel faster are impeded, collect behind them, and end up "compressed", setting up the conditions for a chain, reaction multicar pileup.
- With an inter-lane drift a driver wishing to pass a slower car soon has an opening to switch lanes and proceed.
- With the slowest lane to the right and increasing speed to the left, merges and exits require less speed change and have better timing margins, long-distance traffic proceeds rapidly with little disturbance, and lane changes are easy. Drivers have the opportunity to rapidly distribute themselves among the lanes and drive at a speed where they're comfortable.
- When driving at the same speed as an adjacent vehicle you increase your risk of collision:
- If you're in a blind spot you STAY in the blind spot for a long time. The window of opportunity for the adjacent driver to happen to make a lane change into you - or into the space immediately in front of you, becomes much larger than if you had a relative drift.
- If you hold relative position the other driver's peripheral-vision motion detector doesn't keep him aware of your presence. After a minute or so you're likely to fall out of his attention. Then, if a sudden traffic situation makes him need to change lanes suddenly (or he just wants to change lanes and forgets to do a recheck), he may swerve into you.
(By the way: The two-way two-lane equivalent of the rolling road-block chain-reaction-collision precursor is the "rat pack", a term of art in traffic engineering. It occurs when the first driver goes slightly over the limit and the second driver won't pass because he doesn't want to risk the necessary speed, but follows too closely for following cars to pass in two single-car hops. Fault is primarily on the second driver.)
Fahrenheit designed his scale in 1724. They weren't salting the roads and nobody was going fast enough or on a smooth enough surface for road salt to matter.
I didn't say it was by design. It's a convenient fallout of the arbitrary choices he made when coming up with a scale for his freshly-invented mercury-in-glass thermometer.
Road salt doesn't reduce that point to 0 F. Yes, but it's close. (The scale was originally designed with ammonium chloride, anyhow.) you can't maintain the salt concentration that high. Not a problem: They distribute gravel-sized chunks of salt, which take a while to dissolve even in running water. These melt randomly located and sized holes in the ice, which gives it a non-smooth texture (for traction) and breaks it up (for plowing aside).
Hyperthermia starts at 104 F which (with a basal metabolisim equivalent to running a minimum of a 75-watt bulb in your guts and head) you reach real-soon-now when the temperature is about 100F and you're dehydrated and the real normal body temperature is 98.6 F No, it's not. That's the typical measurement under the tongue - somewhat cooler than the core of the body, thanks largely to mechanisms to cool the brain. Subtract about a degree (97.6) for axilary (underarm) rather than oral, add about a degree (99.6) for rectal - which still isn't the hottest part of your core.
Yes, they're both approximate, so you have to use care as they're approached, as well as when they're exceeded. But how nice that a round number tags the (even if approximate) transition into unusual danger.
The Dutch have expanded into the ocean and used wind power for quite a while.
They've expanded their country by building dikes, pumping out water using windmill pumps, and reclaiming the seabed.
Building an artificial island and surrounding it with windmills to generate enormous amounts of electrical energy (rather than, say, building nuclear reactors) is right in character. B-)
(Back in the mid 20th century, one of the Lampoon magazines had a joke conspiracy theory article about the Dutch taking over the world by expanding out into the ocean and pushing the water up onto everybody else's country. It somehow involved people in other countries being awakened by the sound of chainsaws, wielded by invading Dutch military squads, being applied to their kitchen doors (to convert them into the two-segment, house-ventilating, "Dutch doors").)
Customary are far more convenient for the tasks they're optimized for.
The Farenhiet scale is another example, where the definitions make the scale a strong mnemonic for certain situations:
* 100 was set as a best guess at the time for the human body's internal temperature. (They got within a fraction of a degree.) When temperatures approach or exceed 100 F, it isn't enough to just relax when you're getting overheated. You must stay hydrated or suffer heat stroke and risk death.
* zero was set at the coldest temperature they could easily and repeatedly generate in a lab: The melting point of pure ice saturated with salt (at sea level pressure, etc.) This is important when driving in states that salt their roads in the winter. When the temperature in degrees F goes negative the salt stops working. Drive VERY carefully or you end up in the ditch, risking death.
Given that those situations are deadly AND rare, it'37.s nice that these easy to remember round numbers flag them. Meanwhile, the boiling and freezing points of water (212F and 32F) are used often enough that they get memorized. With C, 100 and zero are boil and freeze, but will you remember 37.777... and -17.7777 as important numbers for heat stroke and deadly road conditions?
Take an active role in your health care and question why you can't use a generic ...
And remember that, for some things, you really shouldn't use the generic - even when the FDA and your insurance company say it's just fine.
For example: Synthroid. This is a drug where:
- the activity level is critical - you're replacing (all or part of) an important signal in a broken (or degraded) feedback loop with a constant output
- but (unlike insulin) the tests are not easy enough to do real-time to recreate the feedback loop - so you take them every few months and adjust accordingly
- being off too far can cause permanent neurological and other damage
- the generic formulations are often far off the claimed dose, degrade at a different rate than the brand-name drug, or (in some cases) appear to be counterfeit with no activity whatsoever
... more importantly, you are guaranteed it will have exactly the amount of niacin it says on the label.
If I have this right:
Actually, you're guaranteed that the company did tests that show that, if it is not beyond the expiration date and hasn't been improperly stored, the drug will have at least 95% of the activity it claims on the label (for the on-label applications).
That's a heck of a lot tighter than OTC vitamins (even absent fraud). But let's be careful about saying "exactly".
(Lots of drugs are still quite potent far beyond their labelled expiration dates, though you don't necessarily know HOW potent. The manufacturing-to-expiration time is often when the company decided the formulation had adequate shelf life and stopped paying for testing, rather than the point where the drug degraded enough that it was close to missing the potency requirements.)
Umm...how do electronics work without metal? Are they using tubes of salt water as conductors instead?
They don't have ENOUGH metal - especially big enough pieces of thick, long, highly-conductive metal, to significantly affect the low, penetrating, radio signals used by the "metal detectors".
A large coin might possibly set one of these detectors off. A piece of electronics the same size or smaller, with plastic case, fiberglass printed circuit board, and fine wires shorter than the circumference of that coin (on the board or even tinier from point to point within the chips) is a much harder to "see" target. If the battery isn't enough to set such a gadget off, the whole phone would be only slightly more "visible".
The metal detector has to be INsensitive enough that it doesn't go off from dental fillings - or it would be going off all the time, and thus be ignored as useless. Make a phone that's a "smaller" target than a mouth full of metal and you can expect it to be missed, too.
(Subject asks it all.)
One stock device for cardiologists is synthetic-aperture doppler ultrasound sonar imaging
Alias "echocardiogram". I get a couple of these per year just for screening:
- One resting.
- A couple more as a "stress echo" - one just before and one just after a session on a treadmill (or an injection of a drug if my leg joints are acting up) to pump up the heart rate and dilate the vessels.
I also get (using the same or a similar system) occasional measurements of blood flow in various vessels, such as major arteries and veins, especially leg veins (looking for valve failures that might lead to clotting and heart attack) and the first fork of the carotid artery (where atherosclerosis can start up, leading impaired blood flow and brain damage or clotting and stroke).
It's also good for imaging all sorts of soft organs, such as kidneys (looking for things like cysts or cancers), a foetus (looking for prenatal problems), etc.
I'm really curious how you can map a heart without actually touching the endocardium.
Just off the top of my head:
There are a number of non-invasive imaging technologies that can be "strobed" in synchronization with the heart's motion to produce a series of 3-D images which, together, amount to a moving picture of the cyclic activity, complete with various annotation (such as blood velocity maps, electro-chemical activity, etc.).
One stock device for cardiologists is synthetic-aperture doppler ultrasound sonar imaging. A wide hand-held probe, with the junction to the skin joined by a slimy jelly with about the same speed-of-sound as soft tissue, connected to a high-end laptop running appropriate software, can construct such mappings in real-time, in sessions lasting minutes, annotated with blood flow information.
Other possibilities include magnetic resonance imaging (the functional version if you want to visualize the cyclic electrochemical activity) and computer aided tomography scanning.
And that's just for starters.
"but if it's free from the sky how will the rich get richer"
By selling collection systems.
"It's raining soup. So I want to sell buckets."
Back in the late '60s, when I invented (and tried to patent) an improved solar focusing mirror system, I named it "the bucket" in reference to that line.
(Didn't pursue the patent after the search found a portable microwave antenna using the same principle, granted in 1953. When I DID get around to getting a bunch of patents, a couple decades ago, I found out that an initial rejection was almost pro forma, to be followed by an appeal listing why this patent is different from those the examiner thought might be related. Of the eight or so patents I've gotten so far, only ONE was so new and different that it went through without that "Why is it different from all this similar-sounding stuff?" appeal stage.)
... if you hacked up your own version of the page's code that would say the hashed password was zero-length, ...
I.e. send a "hashed password" that was zero-length.
It could be worse, if it were intel management engine, it would have an empty root password.
If I recall the reports correctly, the IME didn't have an empty root password. Instead it checked the number of bytes that the code running in the remote browser said were the length of the hashed password - rather than the number of bytes the IME server-side code knew were the length of a hashed password.
So if you entered a zero-length password on the normal web page, you'd fail to log in. But if you hacked up your own version of the page's code that would say the hashed password was zero-length, the IME code would believe it, check zero bytes for match (which always passes), and let you in.
So it didn't get discovered (at least publicly) until a security researcher did that hack and had his WTF moment, years after the broken code was deployed.
What's shocking is the number of people willing to jump on the Trump train and take a bullet for him in hopes of being rewarded. You'd think the pile of bodies you have to climb over to get into Trump's circle would clue you in to your odds of success being poor.
At least with Trump it's not literal.
Check out pages 81-85.
I've been advocated, for years, that the NN issue be pulled from the FCC and dropped in the lap of FTC and DOJ. (I even got a copy of my several-years-old paper on the subject into the hands of an FTC functionary, just after the election last year.)
But I was under the impression that the FTC needed a new congressional authorization to exercise such power.
According to THIS:
- The reason they're currently blocked is that the FCC classed the Internet as a common carrier - and THIS (not the Federal Hands Off the Internet legislation) is what's been holding them off.
- By revoking their claim of jurisdiction (upon which courts have frowned), the FTC is unmuzzled immediately.
I don't see a reference to my paper among the thousands of footnotes. (Fine with me - it was for a composition class, not really for Coming to the Attention of People in High Places (to finish the "live in interesting times" curse). But I could care less if it wasn't what got them going in the right direction (or I didn't get credit if I did have some influence).)
Now to see if this claim on the FCC's part is correct and it works like I hope - and they claim it will. Meanwhile ...
Merry Christmas to me - and to us all.
It is highly likely that if NK, or anyone else for that matter, launches an ICBM the first one will get through, showing these missile defense systems to be useless.
Also MAKING them useless.
All they need to do is set off a small one (a few kilotons) at the right altitude (which they've already reached - and ORBITED SATELLITES) over the central US, to EMP the whole North American continent.
That's why it doesn't particularly matter that their first fission nukes were pretty puny. Puny fission bombs are good for two things:
1) EMP
2) Igniting NON-puny FUSION bombs.
Well, ideally, we'd expect Congress to do their job and remove them. Or the President to ask them to resign. But our Founding Fathers expected elected officials to act in good faith, not be corrupt, and yet here we are.
Actually, our Founding Fathers expected the central power to tend to attract the corrupt and corrupt any who arrived not yet corrupt.
That's why they split the government into three parts (with any two in combination able to override the third), complicated the procedures, and put lots of roadblocks in the way of doing things: So it would take a bunch of corrupt officials to get away with anything (and others would have some chance of stopping them).
Jefferson thought we'd have to mash a (violent) revolutionary reset button every couple decades, anyhow. But they wrought better than they knew, and their tell-me-three-times redundant system has tended to self correct. It still had a lot of problems, and hurt a lot of people. But (except for the Civil War) it didn't start seriously and persistently going off the rails until about WW I - 14 decades rather than two.
Want to know why we got tTrump? Because a lot of people got sick of the "deep-state" "two-headed singl- party" "swamp" and he was the biggest monkey wrench they could grab to throw into the machine.
Didn't work the way they, or you, wanted it to? So what else is new? Unintended consequences are the nature of government power.
There have been utopian no-government proposals in the past.
People always show up, and when enough people have arrived, they need to be governed.
I take issue on the "need".
But when enough people have arrived the potential power over them attracts people who are willing to use force to control them. B-b
Producing bitcoins takes increasingly MORE energy; the cost is exponential, otherwise the price (in USD) would be constant or decreasing.
Think of it as mine tailings, with more tailings per unit of production as the ore runs out. B-b
The PATRIOT act is not a law. It is forbidden by the fourth and fifth amendments to the constitution. Any official exercising any of these usurped powers violates their oath.
True.
Unfortunately, until the Supreme Court has ruled that way, it can be used to harm you just as effectively as if it were a law. B-b
woosh
"whoosh" does not apply to unflagged alleged sarcasm when it's exactly the argument some people make seriously.
On the internet nobody can tell you're being sarcastic.
On the other hand, it seems like millions of dollars of bitcoins get stolen from fools every few months and no one seems to care, so maybe I'm wrong and the level of "security" seen in the field is exactly right.
The theft of bitcoin from the fools, even if it's eventually spent (no earlier than the owner would have spent it), doesn't negatively affect the other owners of bitcoin. They still have theirs. They might take notice of the thefts and try to keep their bitcoin in a more secure storage, but unless and until THEY're robbed, they still have their currency.
If the stolen bitcoin is lost, the rest of the bitcoin just deflated. So its value went UP. The same is true, to a lesser extent, if the thieves hold onto it for a while while it "cools off" (longer than the owner would have held it) before they spend it.
You were going so well. But there's so many reasons for tinnitus that you fell apart. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/....
I was out of date. Thanks for pointing out this more recent information.
The report of the Tinnitis cutting out is a clue.
Tinnitis - ringing in the ears - sometimes (always?) includes a malfunction of a feedback mechanism where an actuator is shaking the ear's innards. You can pick up the "ringing in the ears" with a microphone stuck into the ear.
Perhaps the brain is sending the expectation of a loud sound either to that actuator, or to the one that tightens up the eardrum (reducing the sensitivity) to protect the ear's mechanism from loud noises. Either would produce an actual physical stimulus to the ear's sensors, and either might be detectable by an in-the-ear-canal microphone.
... make a false "death penalty" addendum to their file.
Not in Michigan - the first sovereign state to have a constitutional ban on the death penalty. (Pre-statehood there was this botched execution, which so disgusted the citizenry that they banned 'em.)
Note, though, that Michigan gives real multi-decade prison sentences to murderers. Murder is a young man's crime and by the time they get out they aren't young any more.
As of the last time I knew of the stats (admittedly a couple decades back) there was exactly ONE Michigan convicted murderer, released after completing his sentence, who went on to improperly kill again: He ran a stopsign and squashed a pedestrian.