The laser is directed around a bend. It's "impossible" to break the "outer housing" in a manner that allows the light to shoot out in a deathray manner.
The car senses the damage and refuses to turn on at night, until fixed. There's an override for emergencies, but the police are called out for operating an unsafe vehicle.
No, it's the Volvo drivers. "I bought this car because it's the best in a crash, and I want to try it out on someone, you interested?" is about how they drive. You don't need signals if you are secretly hoping someone hits you so you can see how safe you are.
Wait, but I've heard it called "firing" a bow and arrow, and they weren't flaming arrows. Canons were "fired" and carbines weren't (even flint-locks weren't "fired" they were struck). "Fire" means to initiate the release, even if it was initially derived from applying fire to fuses.
There have been a number of studies that indicated that streetlights harm pedestrian safety. The lights don't have universal coverage, and a pedestrian between lights is hit by people like you who assume everyone is lit by a light. Oh, and streetlights increase crime, as they give more shadows from which the nefarious operate.
Working for a company with 4,000,000 users, we are ingress filtered (but only over a very tiny subset of links). It works fine. Why would it fail for a larger company? We know every "legitimate" IP on or through our network, and notify those, when required. IP address ranges are static. They don't change who they are assigned to. And the number of changes to providers for those ranges is low, easily manageable for providers and users alike.
r larger customers that do their own routing from multiple subnets and might legitimately start to send traffic from an IP allocation you have no idea about and thus have blocked because one of their upstream links with a different provider went down.
Assuming they aren't relying on asymmetric routing (a bad thing), if you don't know about a range being sent to you by a customer, how can they receive a reply?
Still, there's no real excuse for not doing this on the edge of networks that are only ever going to have a single known block of IPs behind them though.
Works for dynamically routed networks as well, if they aren't advertising the range through you, don't accept it. That's not going to block any legitimate traffic unless you have route filters and the customer didn't follow the process to get new ranges added to your filters.
The customers and edge ISPs should stop all this. If they don't, they should be sued for billions.
I've done some research. We are no better than they are. There is proof that Cisco spied on foreign governments for the USA. Where's the proof that Huawei did the same for China? Oh, because we don't like them, we don't need no stinkin proof.
A GP chip can't spy. The complexity to be able to do any useful spying in a "random" board would make it easily discovered.
That and the other thing missed here is Cisco has been proven to spy. Huawei hasn't. Yet companies are fleeing Huawei, but not Cisco, so it isn't as issue of spying, but racism (and yes, that term includes non-racial-based nationalism, and xenophobia).
You give them a bike, and all the reasonable combinations of gears. They don't have to use them all at once, but must pick only from the selected ones when assembling the final race bike. What's clueless about that?
"and it is worth noting that gasoline car companies experience an average of five to ten times more fires per car than Tesla." Is Tesla's official stance on the fires. You are asserting the Tesla is lying about the rates of fires?
It didn't seem so "obvious" to me, or the fire department, who haven't substantiated your opinion, at least according to any of the reports I can find.
Yes, the reporter asserted the Tesla ignited and burned the garage, but where's the fire department's report or statement? It's been nearly a month, why is there no "official" report?
Then you were never bullied, you just had run-ins with bullies. There's a difference, but never having actually been bullied, you don't know the difference.
That wouldn't have worked in the situations I was in. And no bully would ever fight by your rules. They circle and all attack at the same time (all are arms length *1.5, and any move to dodge one swing will get you hit from the other side). You can't keep one between you and the rest, when they act in unison. Your advice would have made it worse, not better.
Were you ever actually bullied, or are you just making up shit based on how you think it "should" work, or what you saw on TV?
Yes, the headline should have read "Telsa damaged in garage fire", but that's not sensational enough. Both linked articles state the car "caused" the fire (one more indirectly regarding what "ignited"), but neither indicate that any official or anyone but a reporter's guess confirms it. For all we know, the meth lab in the basement caught fire and burned a garage with a Tesla in it.
Or if they did define it, they defined it as the "scientific study of the effects of season and tides on biometrics". A reasonable, if slightly strained, definition of Astrology. Originally it was science, at least as much as amateur astronomy is today. That it's not always clear what is meant (often because the reader is unfamiliar or unsure of the term) doesn't help.
And by "around the same amount", well, during a bout of unemployment a few years ago, with my SO making six figures and me "making" $350 a week as a waste of flesh, we STILL would have lost money if we had filed as married.
That sounds implausible. Aside from the different standard deductions, She'd have been in the 28% bracket singly, or 25% bracket married. It wasn't until my wife made more than 50% of what I did where it kicked in being cheaper to be single than married. But then, much of "our" things were in only one name, so we didn't have much wiggle room in assigning deductions and such.
The first year I was married, I paid less than 10% federal income tax, and less than 20% total tax (including all state and local taxes). Combined gross income was above $100k. $100k gross is the top 10% of wage earners. So the top 10% of wage earners are paying less than 10% income tax (based on my experience). I was paying more than that before marriage, and it's creped up after, as her income has risen.
Slashdot Mirror
The laser is directed around a bend. It's "impossible" to break the "outer housing" in a manner that allows the light to shoot out in a deathray manner.
The car senses the damage and refuses to turn on at night, until fixed. There's an override for emergencies, but the police are called out for operating an unsafe vehicle.
No, it's the Volvo drivers. "I bought this car because it's the best in a crash, and I want to try it out on someone, you interested?" is about how they drive. You don't need signals if you are secretly hoping someone hits you so you can see how safe you are.
Wait, but I've heard it called "firing" a bow and arrow, and they weren't flaming arrows. Canons were "fired" and carbines weren't (even flint-locks weren't "fired" they were struck). "Fire" means to initiate the release, even if it was initially derived from applying fire to fuses.
It's *your* English skills that are lacking.
Don't take him seriously. "open highway" means interstate/motorway. He's just adjusting the definition to match his opinion.
There have been a number of studies that indicated that streetlights harm pedestrian safety. The lights don't have universal coverage, and a pedestrian between lights is hit by people like you who assume everyone is lit by a light. Oh, and streetlights increase crime, as they give more shadows from which the nefarious operate.
They have, and it didn't matter.
Bush was just continuing Clinton's policies.
Working for a company with 4,000,000 users, we are ingress filtered (but only over a very tiny subset of links). It works fine. Why would it fail for a larger company? We know every "legitimate" IP on or through our network, and notify those, when required. IP address ranges are static. They don't change who they are assigned to. And the number of changes to providers for those ranges is low, easily manageable for providers and users alike.
r larger customers that do their own routing from multiple subnets and might legitimately start to send traffic from an IP allocation you have no idea about and thus have blocked because one of their upstream links with a different provider went down.
Assuming they aren't relying on asymmetric routing (a bad thing), if you don't know about a range being sent to you by a customer, how can they receive a reply?
Still, there's no real excuse for not doing this on the edge of networks that are only ever going to have a single known block of IPs behind them though.
Works for dynamically routed networks as well, if they aren't advertising the range through you, don't accept it. That's not going to block any legitimate traffic unless you have route filters and the customer didn't follow the process to get new ranges added to your filters.
The customers and edge ISPs should stop all this. If they don't, they should be sued for billions.
I've done some research. We are no better than they are. There is proof that Cisco spied on foreign governments for the USA. Where's the proof that Huawei did the same for China? Oh, because we don't like them, we don't need no stinkin proof.
A GP chip can't spy. The complexity to be able to do any useful spying in a "random" board would make it easily discovered.
That and the other thing missed here is Cisco has been proven to spy. Huawei hasn't. Yet companies are fleeing Huawei, but not Cisco, so it isn't as issue of spying, but racism (and yes, that term includes non-racial-based nationalism, and xenophobia).
You give them a bike, and all the reasonable combinations of gears. They don't have to use them all at once, but must pick only from the selected ones when assembling the final race bike. What's clueless about that?
How can the fire start inside the car and do more damage to a nearby wall than the car?
"and it is worth noting that gasoline car companies experience an average of five to ten times more fires per car than Tesla." Is Tesla's official stance on the fires. You are asserting the Tesla is lying about the rates of fires?
It didn't seem so "obvious" to me, or the fire department, who haven't substantiated your opinion, at least according to any of the reports I can find.
Yes, the reporter asserted the Tesla ignited and burned the garage, but where's the fire department's report or statement? It's been nearly a month, why is there no "official" report?
Then you were never bullied, you just had run-ins with bullies. There's a difference, but never having actually been bullied, you don't know the difference.
That wouldn't have worked in the situations I was in. And no bully would ever fight by your rules. They circle and all attack at the same time (all are arms length *1.5, and any move to dodge one swing will get you hit from the other side). You can't keep one between you and the rest, when they act in unison. Your advice would have made it worse, not better.
Were you ever actually bullied, or are you just making up shit based on how you think it "should" work, or what you saw on TV?
Yes, the headline should have read "Telsa damaged in garage fire", but that's not sensational enough. Both linked articles state the car "caused" the fire (one more indirectly regarding what "ignited"), but neither indicate that any official or anyone but a reporter's guess confirms it. For all we know, the meth lab in the basement caught fire and burned a garage with a Tesla in it.
They were not disproportionate.
Or the fire was caused by a cigarette left burning on the seat, or some other owner-caused action that would have happened in any car.
Or if they did define it, they defined it as the "scientific study of the effects of season and tides on biometrics". A reasonable, if slightly strained, definition of Astrology. Originally it was science, at least as much as amateur astronomy is today. That it's not always clear what is meant (often because the reader is unfamiliar or unsure of the term) doesn't help.
And by "around the same amount", well, during a bout of unemployment a few years ago, with my SO making six figures and me "making" $350 a week as a waste of flesh, we STILL would have lost money if we had filed as married.
That sounds implausible. Aside from the different standard deductions, She'd have been in the 28% bracket singly, or 25% bracket married. It wasn't until my wife made more than 50% of what I did where it kicked in being cheaper to be single than married. But then, much of "our" things were in only one name, so we didn't have much wiggle room in assigning deductions and such.
The first year I was married, I paid less than 10% federal income tax, and less than 20% total tax (including all state and local taxes). Combined gross income was above $100k. $100k gross is the top 10% of wage earners. So the top 10% of wage earners are paying less than 10% income tax (based on my experience). I was paying more than that before marriage, and it's creped up after, as her income has risen.
You realize that getting married means you get to pay MORE in taxes, right?
Nope. Dropped my taxes.