So if two listing, burning ships strap themselves together, do they float better? Or do they just sink faster? It seems to me that if your browser market-share is dropping and you're losing relevance, the best move is probably not to attach yourself to a search engine whose market share and relevance were lost years ago.
Because it would be meaningless to "compensate" for the time difference between clocks moving and accelerating differently. Time literally moves at different rates in different reference frames. The clocks are correct; the problem is that the concept of similtaneity is fundamentally flawed.
No, I do not want a "smart watch" any more than I want any other "smart" jewelry. Purely functional timepieces are obsolete. If all you want is to know the time, your phone already solves that problem for you - hence the decrease in percentage of people wearing watches. A modern wristwatch is a piece of jewelry where its functionality (and the means of achieving it) are part of the beauty. "Smart watches" have enhanced functionality, but universally at the expense of beauty. The aesthetics are terrible, thus defeating the primary purpose of a watch these days.
Since the summary links you to a stupid news article and not the guides themselves, here is the ACLU Guide and EFF Guides here.
The EFF guide you linked has not been updated yet to reflect the Riley decision. Some of those answers need to be changed because they are incorrect now. The ACLU "Know Your Rights" manual does not appear to have been updated either, but it simply doesn't address the issue of cell phone searches incident to arrest at all.
Soooooo.... we tax ourselves to make China change? Because that's what's being proposed. Tariffs are passed straight through to the buyers of the products. We we're raising prices on imported goods, to change the behavior of the manufacturers, who will still take in the same revenue. As long as domestic manufacturing remains more expensive than the imports plus tariffs, we will still be buying the imported goods, just paying more for them and funneling the extra money back to the federal government.
95 years of confusing the heck out of second-semester physics students! You didn't think you signed up for a calculus-based philosophy class with numerical answers to epistemological questions...
A weapon intended for target practice, sport, or self defense has absolutely no need for a flash suppressor. This type of "feature" is intended for covert use of the weapon, which I'd argue falls under what most would categorize as an assault weapon.
Aside from your apparent lack of knowledge about what different types of weapons and accessories are used for, your general premise is mostly correct. Flash suppressors are more useful in actual combat than in most other situations. That type of use is exactly what the Second Amendment explicitly protects. Target practice, sport, hunting, and defense from crime are merely secondary byproducts of having a "well regulated"* militia.
* "regulated" meant "equipped" at the time it was written - see DC v. Heller for a detailed analysis.
"the syringe-like printer head has used silver-filled silicon to create circuitry"
No, it didn't. That's SILICONE not silicon. I mean, come on. This is a technical article on a technical website. Can't we at least get basic chemistry right? Do you fill your car's gas tank with carbon? If there's one damn place on the internet where people can be expected to know enough about science to see the difference between a hard, shiny metallic element and a class of clear rubbery compounds that happen to contain that element, it should be here.
A Tesla S has an 85kWh battery. To charge that in 30 seconds requires 10,200,000 watts of power - approximately the full electrical service to a decent size skyscraper. That's 42,500 amps at 240V, the full maximum power available to over 212 modern homes and a totally impractical amount of current to handle with any reasonable electrical equipment. So while fast-charging batteries are great and a necessary step forward in technology, the universal adoption of electric cars will require not just upgrading our infrastructure, but a complete rethinking and redevelopment of the electrical grid using not-yet-imagined technologies.
As a plaintiff's attorney (the one doing the suing of large companies), I often need confidentiality terms in settlement agreements for a variety of strategic reasons. It is not an abusive tactic used by large companies against individuals, it is a specifically bargained-for provision of a settlement contract which both attorneys negotiate. The last thing anyone needs is more legislation controlling what kinds of deals people are or are not allowed to make.
The new single-chip radar solutions and FMCW radar modules are definitely much easier to use and more capable than what was available just a few years ago, but DIY radar is nothing new. Amateur radio operators have been playing with radar guns and door sensors for decades, and doing some pretty interesting things with them. I remember reading photocopies of articles from QST from the 1970's that explained how to hack door sensors to make speed detectors, as well as using them for long-distance voice and video transmission with parabolic reflectors. People have also been playing with marine radar, which is considerably more expensive but still affordable for a dedicated experimenter.
From Judge Karas' opinion: "Thus, the output data generated by using Newton’s Second Law of
Motion — force equals mass times acceleration, or “F=ma” — would be a series of
uncopyrightable facts, even though the output is in some sense an estimation because Newton’s
formula fails does not consider relativistic effects."
No wonder he made the right decision on this case.
Car audio competitors exceed 154dB all the time. That's not even close to the sound pressure levels achieved in world-class competitions: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...
That's 28.5dB louder than this testing facility, a factor of 707 times more power.
Decibels relative to what? Maybe not ambient...
Sound pressure level is measured relative to 1dB (duh), which is typically defined as 20uPa.
That's all certainly true. The facility is very impressive. Not because of the 154dB number, but because of all the other engineering factors involved. There's no doubt that the total amount of power involved is way higher than any audio system, and that it would be very unhealthy to stand in the box. It's just a bit odd and misleading to tout the SPL number as somehow being really impressive, when the chav blasting his ridiculous stereo at 3AM may be in the same dB ballpark.
Car audio competitors exceed 154dB all the time. That's not even close to the sound pressure levels achieved in world-class competitions: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...
That's 28.5dB louder than this testing facility, a factor of 707 times more power.
Patents should be viewed the way most businesspeople view lawyers. A necessary evil. Too expensive, wasteful, a time sink.
Yeah, that's how we attorneys get most of our expensive business litigation cases. Business owners ignore legal counsel until they are in WAY too deep over their heads. Attorneys are like business consultants, but usually more important. Failing to seek and heed legal counsel is the number one cause of giant expensive messes for small and medium businesses. Large businesses and well-run medium ones don't have this problem, because they use their legal counsel to guide their decision-making appropriately.
Kidney stones supposedly hurt like hell (no personal experience here), but it's not something people generally die from.
They sure can be fatal. I would have died from a kidney stone if it weren't for modern medical technology. A stone which is too large to pass obstructs the ureter, which prevents the kidney from draining urine into the bladder. A kidney that can't drain will be permanently damaged and fail within a day or two. Worse, stones can become infected (as mine did), resulting in a kidney infection which will rapidly cause permanent damage and will progress to sepsis and death within days.
Glad everybody is safe. Cue the impending doom guys to work more ice into it's getting warmer paper WTB more grant and endowment funding for fun vacation trips.
Yeah, climate change is a load of crap! Why, I heard that just a couple months ago the whole state of Minnesota turned from lush greenery into an icy snow-covered wasteland! Entire lakes froze over, that didn't have any ice at all in the previous months. Surely the world climate can't be gradually warming over many decades if certain areas ever get any colder in the short term!
For you edification, the firearm he is describing appears to be a very high-end double rifle, in "12 bore" size (0.739"). That is a dangerous game rifle, and may well cost over $100,000.
*Disclaimer* I did not read the article. (Anyone surprised)
By claiming that their 4th amendment rights were violated, they basically just pled guilty. The proper defense is "ZOMG some sicko hacked my WiFi!"
Not at all. There are plenty of circumstances where a 4th Amendment challenge may exist in addition to other legal and factual defenses. For example, let's say you are driving a convertible and get pulled over by the police for no good reason, and they proceed to search your car without probable cause and find a baggie of drugs in the back seat. You have two 4th Amendment challenges here - both to the stop, and also to the search. You also have a defense that the baggie in the back seat of a convertible may not have been yours, since anyone could have dropped it in there. Challenging a search on constitutional grounds is not an admission of anything.
Slashdot Mirror
So if two listing, burning ships strap themselves together, do they float better? Or do they just sink faster? It seems to me that if your browser market-share is dropping and you're losing relevance, the best move is probably not to attach yourself to a search engine whose market share and relevance were lost years ago.
Because it would be meaningless to "compensate" for the time difference between clocks moving and accelerating differently. Time literally moves at different rates in different reference frames. The clocks are correct; the problem is that the concept of similtaneity is fundamentally flawed.
1. Powered Flight 2. Bending Light 3. Traveling Greater than 300mph 4. Transparent Aluminum 5. Artificial Diamonds
All of these "Feats" of human ingenuity were once thought to be impossible by the physics standards of the day.
Physics and our understanding of it, continues to evolve every moment we live.
To say the words "It Cannot Be Done" after seeing all we have done already... Is kind of foolish.
We will learn how to accomplish this feat, or one very similar that accomplishes the same goal, Eventually...
That, is the power of Consciousness My Friends.
All hail the thinking, reasoning, Problem Solving, Human Consciousness!
Hold up there, turbo. Transparent aluminum? Surely you're not serious. And don't post a link to something about aluminum oxide or other ceramics.
Mercury alloys don't tend to be very good for much of anything, except where the process of amalgamation is important - and that's not here.
A trillion Bq is a fairly small number, especially when spread over a large area. That's pretty insignificant.
No, I do not want a "smart watch" any more than I want any other "smart" jewelry. Purely functional timepieces are obsolete. If all you want is to know the time, your phone already solves that problem for you - hence the decrease in percentage of people wearing watches. A modern wristwatch is a piece of jewelry where its functionality (and the means of achieving it) are part of the beauty. "Smart watches" have enhanced functionality, but universally at the expense of beauty. The aesthetics are terrible, thus defeating the primary purpose of a watch these days.
Since the summary links you to a stupid news article and not the guides themselves, here is the ACLU Guide and EFF Guides here.
The EFF guide you linked has not been updated yet to reflect the Riley decision. Some of those answers need to be changed because they are incorrect now. The ACLU "Know Your Rights" manual does not appear to have been updated either, but it simply doesn't address the issue of cell phone searches incident to arrest at all.
Soooooo.... we tax ourselves to make China change? Because that's what's being proposed. Tariffs are passed straight through to the buyers of the products. We we're raising prices on imported goods, to change the behavior of the manufacturers, who will still take in the same revenue. As long as domestic manufacturing remains more expensive than the imports plus tariffs, we will still be buying the imported goods, just paying more for them and funneling the extra money back to the federal government.
95 years of confusing the heck out of second-semester physics students! You didn't think you signed up for a calculus-based philosophy class with numerical answers to epistemological questions...
4.6kW, eh? That's 6.2 horsepower. I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that number is wrong by several orders of magnitude. 4.6MW is more likely.
A weapon intended for target practice, sport, or self defense has absolutely no need for a flash suppressor. This type of "feature" is intended for covert use of the weapon, which I'd argue falls under what most would categorize as an assault weapon.
Aside from your apparent lack of knowledge about what different types of weapons and accessories are used for, your general premise is mostly correct. Flash suppressors are more useful in actual combat than in most other situations. That type of use is exactly what the Second Amendment explicitly protects. Target practice, sport, hunting, and defense from crime are merely secondary byproducts of having a "well regulated"* militia.
* "regulated" meant "equipped" at the time it was written - see DC v. Heller for a detailed analysis.
"the syringe-like printer head has used silver-filled silicon to create circuitry"
No, it didn't. That's SILICONE not silicon. I mean, come on. This is a technical article on a technical website. Can't we at least get basic chemistry right? Do you fill your car's gas tank with carbon? If there's one damn place on the internet where people can be expected to know enough about science to see the difference between a hard, shiny metallic element and a class of clear rubbery compounds that happen to contain that element, it should be here.
A Tesla S has an 85kWh battery. To charge that in 30 seconds requires 10,200,000 watts of power - approximately the full electrical service to a decent size skyscraper. That's 42,500 amps at 240V, the full maximum power available to over 212 modern homes and a totally impractical amount of current to handle with any reasonable electrical equipment. So while fast-charging batteries are great and a necessary step forward in technology, the universal adoption of electric cars will require not just upgrading our infrastructure, but a complete rethinking and redevelopment of the electrical grid using not-yet-imagined technologies.
As a plaintiff's attorney (the one doing the suing of large companies), I often need confidentiality terms in settlement agreements for a variety of strategic reasons. It is not an abusive tactic used by large companies against individuals, it is a specifically bargained-for provision of a settlement contract which both attorneys negotiate. The last thing anyone needs is more legislation controlling what kinds of deals people are or are not allowed to make.
The new single-chip radar solutions and FMCW radar modules are definitely much easier to use and more capable than what was available just a few years ago, but DIY radar is nothing new. Amateur radio operators have been playing with radar guns and door sensors for decades, and doing some pretty interesting things with them. I remember reading photocopies of articles from QST from the 1970's that explained how to hack door sensors to make speed detectors, as well as using them for long-distance voice and video transmission with parabolic reflectors. People have also been playing with marine radar, which is considerably more expensive but still affordable for a dedicated experimenter.
From Judge Karas' opinion: "Thus, the output data generated by using Newton’s Second Law of Motion — force equals mass times acceleration, or “F=ma” — would be a series of uncopyrightable facts, even though the output is in some sense an estimation because Newton’s formula fails does not consider relativistic effects."
No wonder he made the right decision on this case.
Car audio competitors exceed 154dB all the time. That's not even close to the sound pressure levels achieved in world-class competitions: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...
That's 28.5dB louder than this testing facility, a factor of 707 times more power.
Decibels relative to what? Maybe not ambient...
Sound pressure level is measured relative to 1dB (duh), which is typically defined as 20uPa.
That's all certainly true. The facility is very impressive. Not because of the 154dB number, but because of all the other engineering factors involved. There's no doubt that the total amount of power involved is way higher than any audio system, and that it would be very unhealthy to stand in the box. It's just a bit odd and misleading to tout the SPL number as somehow being really impressive, when the chav blasting his ridiculous stereo at 3AM may be in the same dB ballpark.
Car audio competitors exceed 154dB all the time. That's not even close to the sound pressure levels achieved in world-class competitions: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v... That's 28.5dB louder than this testing facility, a factor of 707 times more power.
Huh. I could have sworn Kinect already did most of this. What's the new part, exactly?
Patents should be viewed the way most businesspeople view lawyers. A necessary evil. Too expensive, wasteful, a time sink.
Yeah, that's how we attorneys get most of our expensive business litigation cases. Business owners ignore legal counsel until they are in WAY too deep over their heads. Attorneys are like business consultants, but usually more important. Failing to seek and heed legal counsel is the number one cause of giant expensive messes for small and medium businesses. Large businesses and well-run medium ones don't have this problem, because they use their legal counsel to guide their decision-making appropriately.
Kidney stones supposedly hurt like hell (no personal experience here), but it's not something people generally die from.
They sure can be fatal. I would have died from a kidney stone if it weren't for modern medical technology. A stone which is too large to pass obstructs the ureter, which prevents the kidney from draining urine into the bladder. A kidney that can't drain will be permanently damaged and fail within a day or two. Worse, stones can become infected (as mine did), resulting in a kidney infection which will rapidly cause permanent damage and will progress to sepsis and death within days.
Glad everybody is safe. Cue the impending doom guys to work more ice into it's getting warmer paper WTB more grant and endowment funding for fun vacation trips.
Yeah, climate change is a load of crap! Why, I heard that just a couple months ago the whole state of Minnesota turned from lush greenery into an icy snow-covered wasteland! Entire lakes froze over, that didn't have any ice at all in the previous months. Surely the world climate can't be gradually warming over many decades if certain areas ever get any colder in the short term!
12 cal? Yeah, your story checks out! /s
For you edification, the firearm he is describing appears to be a very high-end double rifle, in "12 bore" size (0.739"). That is a dangerous game rifle, and may well cost over $100,000.
*Disclaimer* I did not read the article. (Anyone surprised) By claiming that their 4th amendment rights were violated, they basically just pled guilty. The proper defense is "ZOMG some sicko hacked my WiFi!"
Not at all. There are plenty of circumstances where a 4th Amendment challenge may exist in addition to other legal and factual defenses. For example, let's say you are driving a convertible and get pulled over by the police for no good reason, and they proceed to search your car without probable cause and find a baggie of drugs in the back seat. You have two 4th Amendment challenges here - both to the stop, and also to the search. You also have a defense that the baggie in the back seat of a convertible may not have been yours, since anyone could have dropped it in there. Challenging a search on constitutional grounds is not an admission of anything.