The other random rocks had to be included (for consistency) if pluto was to be declared a planet. I don't believe any of them had regular orbits, nor wre they properly spherical. Meanwhile, they were as big or bigger than pluto.
I dunno. NASA grows fish tissue in a nutrient solution with the aid of a mushroom protein. The technique has been applied to growing beef muscle tissue as well, though the texture's wrong.
So, if a piece of valid, well-supported scientific research disagrees with your personally held beliefs, it's a competing religion. Right. How about checking your definition of 'religion', 'kay?
Yeah, sure, evolutions's a theory, but then, so is relativity. Evolution is actually better-tested than general relativity. It's testable; the only thing we can't test about it is scale, but there's no evidence supporting the idea that genetic change over time is not scalable. Meanwhile, being testable kind of differentiates it from religion (which is, by its very nature, not).
Reality disagreeing with your imaginary friend? I don't care, and I doubt the federal government does either.
Meanwhile, your entire rant smacks not of red state bumpkinism, but of psychotic zealotism. I know a good doctor, maybe you should see him.
Ok, there's a lot wrong with that statement. Evolution is a name describing the method by which self-replicating entities adapt. It can't be created; it's an action. So, -1 point for using it as a noun.
Next: If you're worried about why we keep killing our fellow man, I would suggest reading up on social evolution, and specifically cultural adaptation in chimpanzees. We know it's something wrong with our psychological makeup; we evolved from somewhat violent apes. Slowly, surely, as society implictly promotes a de facto death penalty for being a thug, we evolve away from it.
Last: Saying "God Created Evolution" would - to the mind of a scientist who's never had a deity concept - beg the question: "Fine. What is the nature of this God fellow? I'd like to ask him a few questions and see if we can set up an experiment."
Science has repeatedly disproven the stories found within the religious tomes in the world. Still, that doesn't mean that a god doesn't exist in some form or another; it simply means that he can't be trusted.
Meanwhile, god's existence doesn't\H\H\H\H\H\H\Hshouldn't really matter one way or another when it comes to making policy decisions.
I don't know that that's correct either; the question is not how much it costs to have a few milligrams of carbon fiber. The question is how much does it cost to attach that fiber to a chip in a way that allows it to be used as an oscillator?
The net is presently de-facto neutral, i.e., the telcos do not prioritize TCP/IP traffic, aside from the base prio flag in packets (which are ubiquitously set to 'high'). As such, even when 'the tubes are clogged', all packets get through a given router at roughly equal rates.
Meanwhile, if the telcos quash NN as they intend, they plan to offer prioritized services, thus slowing down or even stopping the travel of non-prioritized packets at their routers (if the people paying for High-prio services are trying to use it).
It's really only a question at limit points; do you want to treat everyone's data equally, letting it all merge onto the information superhighway, or do you want to give big business the 'me-first' syndrome that makes it impossible to merge onto I-76 during rush hour?
I half-baked an electromagnet-only flat speaker once. It's an array of electromagnets. The first set goes clockwise, is arranged in concentric cylinders, and is mounted to a stiff object, like a graphite or aluminum plate. The second goes counter clockwise, is mounted on the base, and is arranged as concentric cylinders that fit in between the other set. The first set is connected in paralell to the second set through a simple bridge rectifier. The plate is attached to the base by a grooved spindle with a limit notch and a weak spring. The speaker's chamber is maintained by a foam rubber membrane (like that of a classical speaker).
Theoretically, this would be nicely flat, yet have the same sort of range as that of a regular speaker.
It gets even more fun when you realize that you can separate the driver plate into a set of three concentric circles (center for tweeter, middle for midrange, and outside for bass), making a 12-15" wall mountable speaker.
What TFA doesn't mention is that they'll need a tri-color laser diode per mirror asembly. They can be spaced wider than the mirrors if needed. (you'll get a flip of the image if they're aimed properly).
On the other hand, a 5mW green laser looks a lot less bright (and is a lot less bright) than a 5mW red laser. It's because green is a higher energy light.
I dunno, but the chairwoman's reasoning is inherently flawed.
It's not about paying for faster connections; it's about paying for more _reliable_ connections. For example, if, say, Verizon's VoIP has a higher priority than, say, Skype's, your Skype call will skip, as the packets will have a harder time being routed (They'll have to wait in line at the router until it deigns to pass it along).
Which, of course, brings us to the nub of the matter: Mr. Stevens, being an apparently paid and scripted actor for the Telecom industry, suggested that e-mail, for example, would be given higher prio than other services. How long do you think it will be before filesharing clients start overriding port 25 for the purpose of dumping on massive amounts of content (massive amounts of content)?
Re:But what if Microsoft offered it all together?
on
Windows vs Mac Security
·
· Score: 5, Funny
Actually, they're damned if they do something else entirely too.
In order to properly 'believe', you have to take 2 hours out of an increasingly hectic week, 10% of the ever-declining value of your paycheck, hold true to a set of near-arbitrary rules, and, apparently, zealously impart your version of 'wisdom' to everyone you meet.
In short, belief seems like it takes too much damned work. Believe what you want. Just don't bother me with it.
Slashdot Mirror
*sigh*
The other random rocks had to be included (for consistency) if pluto was to be declared a planet. I don't believe any of them had regular orbits, nor wre they properly spherical. Meanwhile, they were as big or bigger than pluto.
So yeah. Lose Pluto, or accept Xena. Your choice.
Correction: 3M/768k
...
I'm paying $40 american for 3G/768M. What gives with that?
Fucking... I'm moving to Canada.
Yeah, if it's cooked rare and made of cow muscle.
mer mer mer... did you say 'prime rib'?
I dunno. NASA grows fish tissue in a nutrient solution with the aid of a mushroom protein. The technique has been applied to growing beef muscle tissue as well, though the texture's wrong.
Hmmm... I like your style.
Damnit, boy, I was trying to be cheeky.
Wow.
So, if a piece of valid, well-supported scientific research disagrees with your personally held beliefs, it's a competing religion. Right. How about checking your definition of 'religion', 'kay?
Yeah, sure, evolutions's a theory, but then, so is relativity. Evolution is actually better-tested than general relativity. It's testable; the only thing we can't test about it is scale, but there's no evidence supporting the idea that genetic change over time is not scalable. Meanwhile, being testable kind of differentiates it from religion (which is, by its very nature, not).
Reality disagreeing with your imaginary friend? I don't care, and I doubt the federal government does either.
Meanwhile, your entire rant smacks not of red state bumpkinism, but of psychotic zealotism. I know a good doctor, maybe you should see him.
*blink*
Wow.
Ok, there's a lot wrong with that statement. Evolution is a name describing the method by which self-replicating entities adapt. It can't be created; it's an action. So, -1 point for using it as a noun.
Next: If you're worried about why we keep killing our fellow man, I would suggest reading up on social evolution, and specifically cultural adaptation in chimpanzees. We know it's something wrong with our psychological makeup; we evolved from somewhat violent apes. Slowly, surely, as society implictly promotes a de facto death penalty for being a thug, we evolve away from it.
Last: Saying "God Created Evolution" would - to the mind of a scientist who's never had a deity concept - beg the question: "Fine. What is the nature of this God fellow? I'd like to ask him a few questions and see if we can set up an experiment."
I hate to toss in a 'me too' comment, but do you find it odd that this got no replies from the ID idiots you always see trolling around here?
You'd think they'd pull something out of their collective asses to contend with the meat of this post.
Mod Parent Up!
Science has repeatedly disproven the stories found within the religious tomes in the world. Still, that doesn't mean that a god doesn't exist in some form or another; it simply means that he can't be trusted.
Meanwhile, god's existence doesn't\H\H\H\H\H\H\Hshouldn't really matter one way or another when it comes to making policy decisions.
There is no faith involved; god's existence doesn't matter.
Wanger? Isn't that a device that places links on Penny Arcade for the purpose of wanging the target site?
Learning how to design the low latency computer control and physics model to accurate fling them boots.
There, I see the connection. can I have my cookie now?
I don't know that that's correct either; the question is not how much it costs to have a few milligrams of carbon fiber. The question is how much does it cost to attach that fiber to a chip in a way that allows it to be used as an oscillator?
Not at all.
The net is presently de-facto neutral, i.e., the telcos do not prioritize TCP/IP traffic, aside from the base prio flag in packets (which are ubiquitously set to 'high'). As such, even when 'the tubes are clogged', all packets get through a given router at roughly equal rates.
Meanwhile, if the telcos quash NN as they intend, they plan to offer prioritized services, thus slowing down or even stopping the travel of non-prioritized packets at their routers (if the people paying for High-prio services are trying to use it).
It's really only a question at limit points; do you want to treat everyone's data equally, letting it all merge onto the information superhighway, or do you want to give big business the 'me-first' syndrome that makes it impossible to merge onto I-76 during rush hour?
That's funny.
I half-baked an electromagnet-only flat speaker once. It's an array of electromagnets. The first set goes clockwise, is arranged in concentric cylinders, and is mounted to a stiff object, like a graphite or aluminum plate. The second goes counter clockwise, is mounted on the base, and is arranged as concentric cylinders that fit in between the other set. The first set is connected in paralell to the second set through a simple bridge rectifier. The plate is attached to the base by a grooved spindle with a limit notch and a weak spring. The speaker's chamber is maintained by a foam rubber membrane (like that of a classical speaker).
Theoretically, this would be nicely flat, yet have the same sort of range as that of a regular speaker.
It gets even more fun when you realize that you can separate the driver plate into a set of three concentric circles (center for tweeter, middle for midrange, and outside for bass), making a 12-15" wall mountable speaker.
Damn, I wish I had access to a machine shop.
What TFA doesn't mention is that they'll need a tri-color laser diode per mirror asembly. They can be spaced wider than the mirrors if needed. (you'll get a flip of the image if they're aimed properly).
On the other hand, a 5mW green laser looks a lot less bright (and is a lot less bright) than a 5mW red laser. It's because green is a higher energy light.
Blue takes up nearly double the power of red.
Why would that necessarily be better?
I mean your TV projects a video image using an electron beam; a laser beam just cuts out the phosphorus middleman.
I dunno, but the chairwoman's reasoning is inherently flawed.
It's not about paying for faster connections; it's about paying for more _reliable_ connections. For example, if, say, Verizon's VoIP has a higher priority than, say, Skype's, your Skype call will skip, as the packets will have a harder time being routed (They'll have to wait in line at the router until it deigns to pass it along).
Which, of course, brings us to the nub of the matter: Mr. Stevens, being an apparently paid and scripted actor for the Telecom industry, suggested that e-mail, for example, would be given higher prio than other services. How long do you think it will be before filesharing clients start overriding port 25 for the purpose of dumping on massive amounts of content (massive amounts of content)?
Actually, they're damned if they do something else entirely too.
They're just damned.
Damned Microsoft.
The first one to scream, obviously. In the tits.
Eh.
In order to properly 'believe', you have to take 2 hours out of an increasingly hectic week, 10% of the ever-declining value of your paycheck, hold true to a set of near-arbitrary rules, and, apparently, zealously impart your version of 'wisdom' to everyone you meet.
In short, belief seems like it takes too much damned work. Believe what you want. Just don't bother me with it.