Also, hockey doesn't cover nearly as much space as football of any sort. Here is a hockey rink inside a football stadium. Putting a building around a hockey rink is quite a common endeavor, especially in places where the ambient temperature would generally not be conducive to a game played on ice. Such an arena is also conducive to basketball, futsal, handball, and several other games specifically tailored to the size of a hockey rink. However, these are not the same games traditionally played outdoors -- basketball has been considered an indoor game from the beginning, even though it is frequently played outdoors, and most other arena games are modifications of outdoor games.
Going indoors would indeed be a solution to the light pollution problem, but in order to take an outdoor game indoors and still have spectator seating means building stadiums that cost hundreds of millions of dollars more than the same capacity without the roof. That's why it is only done when other conditions warrant it, such as unpredictable or extreme weather being common to the region, and sometimes not even then. Also, it is difficult to grow a natural grass surface in a stadium without a retractable roof. In Phoenix, they get around this problem by putting the field itself on rails, and roll it outside when not in use to soak up sunlight.
Because then they wouldn't be made of just cork, string, and leather, and baseball is extremely traditional. Also the impact of bat on ball is much more severe than the impact of stick on puck since the puck stays in contact with (and is accelerated by) the stick for a much longer time. Pucks also have a preferred orientation where baseballs do not, but this probably helps more with the actual tracking than it does with keeping the equipment functioning.
I watched a professional match where four of the final five (the "ladder") bowlers were left-handed. It was fun to see them suddenly scrambling to deal with a breakdown in the oil pattern that right-handed bowlers face in every single competition, while the right-hander was the one who could settle into a groove. (He didn't last long despite this.)
One factor in baseball is that four of the eight positions that are not pitcher are closed to left-handed throwers: catcher, second base, shortstop, and third base. Talented left-handed throwers are therefore either used in the outfield, or become pitchers, or in a few edge cases these players learn to throw right-handed -- Pablo Sandoval immediately comes to mind. First basemen don't need the emphasis on throwing skills. Aside from pitchers, the best opportunities are available to players who bat left-handed (or better yet, switch-hit), but still throw right-handed. Having a batting line-up that alternates L-R prevents the opposing manager from bringing in a relief pitcher that will be effective (due to same-handedness as the hitter) across multiple batters, leading to the rise of the LOOGY -- Lefty One Out GuY.
Other factors leading to left-handed hitters having an advantage are (1) they're a step closer to first base, so they will beat out a slightly higher proportion of ground balls and put more time pressure on the defense which in turn leads to a higher error rate, and (2) some ballparks (like Yankee Stadium) are specifically built to favor left-handed power hitters. This is somewhat offset by defensive infield shifts being easier to implement against left-handed pull hitters, but this is a relatively recent development and although it has existed since the 1940s at least, it was not in common use until the last decade. Scouts and players and managers alike are still adjusting to the new defensive paradigm.
A football field (American, Canadian, Australian, or the Rest Of The World football, they all work here) has to be lit not just at field level, but as high as the ball can be expected to reach during play, and the ball has to be at least partially lit from below when it's in the air so it can be seen. This means angling the lights upward or at least letting their natural spread cover much of the sky.
A baseball can get 200 feet or more in the air. The lights don't track the ball, so every cubic inch of the sky over the ballpark (up 200+ feet) has to be lit constantly. I suppose it could be turned down some between innings, but incandescent lighting doesn't care much for thermal cycling and the standard practice for sports lighting is really built around the era of incandescent lighting, so the upward lights stay on.
Like it or not, society as a whole has accepted that playing outdoor games at night (and simulating daylight) is a good idea, and stadiums that are visible from the moon are a consequence.
Live sports would be about the only reason I would want to have cable or satellite TV. Baseball works well enough on the radio, but hockey? Not so much.
Set up your own in-house "ad server" and intercept the call. Each home-brewed "ad" features only a countdown until it ends, or maybe it gives you 30 seconds of RSS feed. Take the hook provided for the benefit of the advertisers, and use it against them.
I think what the Russians did was simply to stir up shit in the hopes that something would gain traction. Then they could throw their weight behind it. There isn't much to indicate that they scored a "hit" to focus on, but that doesn't mean they didn't try.
Broadcast television is far from dead. I live in a "fringe reception" area for the Los Angeles broadcast area, and still receive in excess of 100 channels including subcarriers.
If watching Trainspotting is any indication, it takes me about twenty minutes to wrap my head around it and then it is perfectly intelligible until they drop words I've never heard before. Since I've seen it already, that can't happen unless someone overdubs it. Even the hilariously subtitled nightclub scene is intelligible. But it takes about half the film before it actually sounds right.
They're only equivalent in 12-tone equal temperament, or on a keyboard instrument that only has 12 notes per octave (equally spaced or not). Western music also maps unambiguously (though not always pleasantly) onto 19- and 31-tone equal temperament, where a double sharp is most definitely not the same as the next whole tone up because a "whole tone" might be 5 minimum increments (this is the case in 31-ET, the better-sounding of the two in most cases), and a semitone just two. This would leave Cx a full 1/31 of an octave flatter than D natural. (And this is why we even have double sharps and double flats, to keep the theory clean because we haven't always mapped everything onto 12-ET and may not always do so in the future.)
We have "modern hammers", and they are used quite a lot in construction. Ever heard of a nail gun? Sure, they haven't totally rendered hammers obsolete (for one thing, they suck at removing nails) but neither will Cx completely replace C.
H1B visa holders aren't the creators of culture here because they don't get to stay permanently. It's a visa, not asylum. Therefore regardless of what color they are, I am not as worried about their presence as I am about the effect their willingness to work cheap has on the rest oft he labor market.
It seems this may be one of those cases where spiteful people end up doing something helpful for all the wrong reasons. You know the real agenda isn't to "encourage" companies to hire domestic talent, it just happens to coincide with their mission to Keep the Brown People Out.
What I was saying is that while computer science and security experts understand the danger, they are just about the only group that does. They need help getting the word out, because the public writes them off as alarmists even in the face of clear evidence that they are right.
Shouldn't it be "the overwhelming majority of computer scientists who've even casually looked at voting security" in favor of paper ballots over the current implementation of computerized voting? Hasn't this been the case for well over a decade?
Unfortunately, the flipped statement is also true. The overwhelming majority of people opposing the current implementation of computerized voting are computer scientists who have even casually looked at voting security. This makes for a fairly small group, and they deserve the assistance of those of us not qualified in CS but who think they're almost certainly right.
Yep, I know a geologist that paid her way through school by working in strip clubs and doing cam shows. Once she had her degree, she disappeared from public view for nine months to do field studies, and when she came back she had no need of her old strip club job -- or the cam show income, for that matter, but she went back to doing shows anyhow. She was also the only one in her class (according to her own words) that left school with more money than she had going in.
Not all of the women doing shows are vapid. Some are, but others simply see no harm in taking advantage of being hot, while simultaneously pursuing their long-term goals.
Slashdot Mirror
Because when your trailer flooded out, so did everyone else's. There isn't a used market in that circumstance.
Also, hockey doesn't cover nearly as much space as football of any sort. Here is a hockey rink inside a football stadium. Putting a building around a hockey rink is quite a common endeavor, especially in places where the ambient temperature would generally not be conducive to a game played on ice. Such an arena is also conducive to basketball, futsal, handball, and several other games specifically tailored to the size of a hockey rink. However, these are not the same games traditionally played outdoors -- basketball has been considered an indoor game from the beginning, even though it is frequently played outdoors, and most other arena games are modifications of outdoor games.
Going indoors would indeed be a solution to the light pollution problem, but in order to take an outdoor game indoors and still have spectator seating means building stadiums that cost hundreds of millions of dollars more than the same capacity without the roof. That's why it is only done when other conditions warrant it, such as unpredictable or extreme weather being common to the region, and sometimes not even then. Also, it is difficult to grow a natural grass surface in a stadium without a retractable roof. In Phoenix, they get around this problem by putting the field itself on rails, and roll it outside when not in use to soak up sunlight.
Because then they wouldn't be made of just cork, string, and leather, and baseball is extremely traditional. Also the impact of bat on ball is much more severe than the impact of stick on puck since the puck stays in contact with (and is accelerated by) the stick for a much longer time. Pucks also have a preferred orientation where baseballs do not, but this probably helps more with the actual tracking than it does with keeping the equipment functioning.
I watched a professional match where four of the final five (the "ladder") bowlers were left-handed. It was fun to see them suddenly scrambling to deal with a breakdown in the oil pattern that right-handed bowlers face in every single competition, while the right-hander was the one who could settle into a groove. (He didn't last long despite this.)
I chose to solve this problem another way: by moving the numeric keypad and cursor keys to the left side of the keyboard.
One factor in baseball is that four of the eight positions that are not pitcher are closed to left-handed throwers: catcher, second base, shortstop, and third base. Talented left-handed throwers are therefore either used in the outfield, or become pitchers, or in a few edge cases these players learn to throw right-handed -- Pablo Sandoval immediately comes to mind. First basemen don't need the emphasis on throwing skills. Aside from pitchers, the best opportunities are available to players who bat left-handed (or better yet, switch-hit), but still throw right-handed. Having a batting line-up that alternates L-R prevents the opposing manager from bringing in a relief pitcher that will be effective (due to same-handedness as the hitter) across multiple batters, leading to the rise of the LOOGY -- Lefty One Out GuY.
Other factors leading to left-handed hitters having an advantage are (1) they're a step closer to first base, so they will beat out a slightly higher proportion of ground balls and put more time pressure on the defense which in turn leads to a higher error rate, and (2) some ballparks (like Yankee Stadium) are specifically built to favor left-handed power hitters. This is somewhat offset by defensive infield shifts being easier to implement against left-handed pull hitters, but this is a relatively recent development and although it has existed since the 1940s at least, it was not in common use until the last decade. Scouts and players and managers alike are still adjusting to the new defensive paradigm.
A football field (American, Canadian, Australian, or the Rest Of The World football, they all work here) has to be lit not just at field level, but as high as the ball can be expected to reach during play, and the ball has to be at least partially lit from below when it's in the air so it can be seen. This means angling the lights upward or at least letting their natural spread cover much of the sky.
A baseball can get 200 feet or more in the air. The lights don't track the ball, so every cubic inch of the sky over the ballpark (up 200+ feet) has to be lit constantly. I suppose it could be turned down some between innings, but incandescent lighting doesn't care much for thermal cycling and the standard practice for sports lighting is really built around the era of incandescent lighting, so the upward lights stay on.
Like it or not, society as a whole has accepted that playing outdoor games at night (and simulating daylight) is a good idea, and stadiums that are visible from the moon are a consequence.
He'll be back in a few years. He's spending a decade dead for tax purposes.
They think the phone might hold the true meaning of covfefe.
They could start by enforcing the laws that already exist, and by sharing relevant information of public record that would have been relevant.
Live sports would be about the only reason I would want to have cable or satellite TV. Baseball works well enough on the radio, but hockey? Not so much.
Set up your own in-house "ad server" and intercept the call. Each home-brewed "ad" features only a countdown until it ends, or maybe it gives you 30 seconds of RSS feed. Take the hook provided for the benefit of the advertisers, and use it against them.
I think what the Russians did was simply to stir up shit in the hopes that something would gain traction. Then they could throw their weight behind it. There isn't much to indicate that they scored a "hit" to focus on, but that doesn't mean they didn't try.
Broadcast television is far from dead. I live in a "fringe reception" area for the Los Angeles broadcast area, and still receive in excess of 100 channels including subcarriers.
Ever try to understand Scottish English?
If watching Trainspotting is any indication, it takes me about twenty minutes to wrap my head around it and then it is perfectly intelligible until they drop words I've never heard before. Since I've seen it already, that can't happen unless someone overdubs it. Even the hilariously subtitled nightclub scene is intelligible. But it takes about half the film before it actually sounds right.
Sorry about that, I get the specifics of 19 and 31 backward for some reason -- like which one has "small" semitones and which "large".
This means Cx is 39 cents sharper than D natural, rather than flatter.
They're only equivalent in 12-tone equal temperament, or on a keyboard instrument that only has 12 notes per octave (equally spaced or not). Western music also maps unambiguously (though not always pleasantly) onto 19- and 31-tone equal temperament, where a double sharp is most definitely not the same as the next whole tone up because a "whole tone" might be 5 minimum increments (this is the case in 31-ET, the better-sounding of the two in most cases), and a semitone just two. This would leave Cx a full 1/31 of an octave flatter than D natural. (And this is why we even have double sharps and double flats, to keep the theory clean because we haven't always mapped everything onto 12-ET and may not always do so in the future.)
We have "modern hammers", and they are used quite a lot in construction. Ever heard of a nail gun? Sure, they haven't totally rendered hammers obsolete (for one thing, they suck at removing nails) but neither will Cx completely replace C.
How exactly is it pronounced? Cause I can already see other language designers claiming "Our language is better than Cx!"
If it's making the reference I think it is, it would be "C double sharp".
H1B visa holders aren't the creators of culture here because they don't get to stay permanently. It's a visa, not asylum. Therefore regardless of what color they are, I am not as worried about their presence as I am about the effect their willingness to work cheap has on the rest oft he labor market.
It seems this may be one of those cases where spiteful people end up doing something helpful for all the wrong reasons. You know the real agenda isn't to "encourage" companies to hire domestic talent, it just happens to coincide with their mission to Keep the Brown People Out.
I think you have completely misunderstood me.
What I was saying is that while computer science and security experts understand the danger, they are just about the only group that does. They need help getting the word out, because the public writes them off as alarmists even in the face of clear evidence that they are right.
Shouldn't it be "the overwhelming majority of computer scientists who've even casually looked at voting security" in favor of paper ballots over the current implementation of computerized voting? Hasn't this been the case for well over a decade?
Unfortunately, the flipped statement is also true. The overwhelming majority of people opposing the current implementation of computerized voting are computer scientists who have even casually looked at voting security. This makes for a fairly small group, and they deserve the assistance of those of us not qualified in CS but who think they're almost certainly right.
Yep, I know a geologist that paid her way through school by working in strip clubs and doing cam shows. Once she had her degree, she disappeared from public view for nine months to do field studies, and when she came back she had no need of her old strip club job -- or the cam show income, for that matter, but she went back to doing shows anyhow. She was also the only one in her class (according to her own words) that left school with more money than she had going in.
Not all of the women doing shows are vapid. Some are, but others simply see no harm in taking advantage of being hot, while simultaneously pursuing their long-term goals.