In fairness, the summary carried that error over from the actual article. But in the article one could recognize the meaning from context. In the summary, it sounds like he simply ignored the feds.
" the (not defined anywhere in the Constitution) 'rules' of the House allowed a smaller group to enforce their wishes"
That's like saying "the laws aren't defined in the Constitution." It's a red herring. The rules (no need to put that word in quotes, acting as if they're illegitimate) are in full accord with the Constitution: "Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings..." Article 1, Section 5.
Stop trying to be pedantic, you're failing. Joules aren't meaningful in this context.
They're interested in generating electricity. The things they'll want to run are measured by how much they consume instantaneously - watts or amps. A house with a 120V / 100 A feed can be accommodate with a 12000 W generator.
Watts make perfect sense.
Joules, OTOH, would be perfectly meaningless and misleading. The $10 solar cell which keeps my car battery charged (~14V ~.15A) could be sold as a "100 megajoule power source." I won't bother saying that energy will take many months to deliver.
You almost had it, but ignored yourself in your rush to correct something which wasn't wrong:
Simplifying one of your statements:"You're interested in producing energy. Watts are a measure of production of energy." Whoosh.
"And don't give me any free market drivel, even the highly modified 'free market' in the US hasn't worked out so well in terms of patient safety."
There's nothing even approaching a free market in the US. You can't negotiate a price (possibly on some elective things, but not much), you can't bring your own aspirin, hell, they can't/won't even tell you what they're charging for their aspirin until you get your bill.
So, "fair" is being able to force one person to pay for the welfare of another. From each according to his ability, to each according to his need. OK, enjoy it.
"The rest of the world looks at the US stance on this and shakes their heads. But, hey, if America wants to be known as heartless bastards where life is cheap, that's your choice."
No, it's just that many believe that charity is a role for private organizations, not government.
unless you're willing to risk your life and liberty. But, congressional elections come in a year, so that's the time to make a difference and throw most of them out.
Server/client is an arbitrary distinction. For example: An X "server" is the keyboard/mouse/display, and the "client" is the application. Exactly the opposite is where a web browser is a "client" talking to a web "server."
No evidence of what? If the phone is drawing more than 1.5 A through a micro USB port, it is in violation of the USB charging spec, and therefore not a USB compliant device. That's a simple fact.
If it draws more than 1.8 A, it's drawing more than the design spec for a micro USB connector. If it overheated and caused a fire, the manufacturer would have significant liability.
You can go read the specs, the USB-IF makes them publicly available.
You'd still be wrong. Micro USB was popular before the EU had anything to do with it. It was that popularity which made it agreeable to the manufacturer's who signed the MoU. The micro USB spec was published in January 2007, more than 3 years before the action in the EU. The two editors for the micro USB spec were from Nokia and Motorola, and their objective was to "meet the current and future needs of the Cell Phone and Portable Devices markets."
Contrary to your ignorant claims, micro USB was specifically developed by the two largest cell phone manufacturers at the time, for use in their phones, long before any governmental interest.
The USB charging spec and the micro USB connector specifications allow for 7.5 W of power (1.5A @ 5V nominal).
There's a voluntary agreement ("Memoradum of Understanding") with many cell phone manufacturers to standardize on micro USB, but it's not mandated. They are now discussing making it a mandate, but that hasn't happened.
The micro USB specification only requires a 1.8 A rating for the power contacts. 2 A would exceed the specification. Perhaps they have a dedicated charger with a non-removable cord and more robust connector.
I suppose that intellectual dishonesty comes from the Editor. If you dig through the links, Mariette DiChristina, Editor in Chief, now says "we were not able to communicate our decision to Dr. Lee before removing the post on a late Friday afternoon before a long weekend," and goes on to talk about "holiday-weekend commitments."
As if sending an email to the authour saying "I did this, let's discuss next week" is difficult. And, who gets Columbus Day off, except the post office and banks?
Slashdot Mirror
In fairness, the summary carried that error over from the actual article. But in the article one could recognize the meaning from context. In the summary, it sounds like he simply ignored the feds.
Back to school for you.
" the (not defined anywhere in the Constitution) 'rules' of the House allowed a smaller group to enforce their wishes"
That's like saying "the laws aren't defined in the Constitution." It's a red herring. The rules (no need to put that word in quotes, acting as if they're illegitimate) are in full accord with the Constitution: "Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings..." Article 1, Section 5.
Stop trying to be pedantic, you're failing. Joules aren't meaningful in this context.
They're interested in generating electricity. The things they'll want to run are measured by how much they consume instantaneously - watts or amps. A house with a 120V / 100 A feed can be accommodate with a 12000 W generator.
Watts make perfect sense.
Joules, OTOH, would be perfectly meaningless and misleading. The $10 solar cell which keeps my car battery charged (~14V ~.15A) could be sold as a "100 megajoule power source." I won't bother saying that energy will take many months to deliver.
You almost had it, but ignored yourself in your rush to correct something which wasn't wrong:
Simplifying one of your statements:"You're interested in producing energy. Watts are a measure of production of energy." Whoosh.
"And don't give me any free market drivel, even the highly modified 'free market' in the US hasn't worked out so well in terms of patient safety."
There's nothing even approaching a free market in the US. You can't negotiate a price (possibly on some elective things, but not much), you can't bring your own aspirin, hell, they can't/won't even tell you what they're charging for their aspirin until you get your bill.
"I don't think I've cleared my cookies in five years..."
You must not binge drink.
So, "fair" is being able to force one person to pay for the welfare of another. From each according to his ability, to each according to his need. OK, enjoy it.
"40 mio?" It apparently works better than your educational system.
"The rest of the world looks at the US stance on this and shakes their heads. But, hey, if America wants to be known as heartless bastards where life is cheap, that's your choice."
No, it's just that many believe that charity is a role for private organizations, not government.
Or instead, maybe simply expect parents to be responsible parents, instead of dual-income welfare providers.
Dave's not clear on the concept.
His whole premise is refuted by the simple fact that Android has a market share three times that of iOS. The market has proven him wrong.
I'll wait to hear about you taking the alternate path. Either that, or you're all talk.
unless you're willing to risk your life and liberty. But, congressional elections come in a year, so that's the time to make a difference and throw most of them out.
Server/client is an arbitrary distinction. For example: An X "server" is the keyboard/mouse/display, and the "client" is the application. Exactly the opposite is where a web browser is a "client" talking to a web "server."
No evidence of what? If the phone is drawing more than 1.5 A through a micro USB port, it is in violation of the USB charging spec, and therefore not a USB compliant device. That's a simple fact.
If it draws more than 1.8 A, it's drawing more than the design spec for a micro USB connector. If it overheated and caused a fire, the manufacturer would have significant liability.
You can go read the specs, the USB-IF makes them publicly available.
they should have just sold policies through eBay and/or Amazon.
You'd still be wrong. Micro USB was popular before the EU had anything to do with it. It was that popularity which made it agreeable to the manufacturer's who signed the MoU. The micro USB spec was published in January 2007, more than 3 years before the action in the EU. The two editors for the micro USB spec were from Nokia and Motorola, and their objective was to "meet the current and future needs of the Cell Phone and Portable Devices markets."
Contrary to your ignorant claims, micro USB was specifically developed by the two largest cell phone manufacturers at the time, for use in their phones, long before any governmental interest.
The USB charging spec and the micro USB connector specifications allow for 7.5 W of power (1.5A @ 5V nominal).
Oh, I see.
Since you're willing to redefine terms to make your case, why not just redefine "popular" to mean "something USB isn't," and be done with it?
You lack spatial skills if you think you need rectifiers to allow DC on a connector with no forced orientation.
None, which blows your whole argument.
There's a voluntary agreement ("Memoradum of Understanding") with many cell phone manufacturers to standardize on micro USB, but it's not mandated. They are now discussing making it a mandate, but that hasn't happened.
The micro USB specification only requires a 1.8 A rating for the power contacts. 2 A would exceed the specification. Perhaps they have a dedicated charger with a non-removable cord and more robust connector.
Oh, people who don't work (comment on academia, not scientists - plenty of whom do real work). Why is it called a "holiday," then?
I suppose that intellectual dishonesty comes from the Editor. If you dig through the links, Mariette DiChristina, Editor in Chief, now says "we were not able to communicate our decision to Dr. Lee before removing the post on a late Friday afternoon before a long weekend," and goes on to talk about "holiday-weekend commitments."
As if sending an email to the authour saying "I did this, let's discuss next week" is difficult. And, who gets Columbus Day off, except the post office and banks?
Wrong paradigm.
DSAT
So, the solution is to make one of them not-a-sheet!
This isn't "suppressing the Casimir force," it's avoiding it.