Therein lies the problem. To some extant, all definitions are subjective, and in giving this instruction the judge undoubtedly biased toward his own views. It would be better if the jury were already knowledgable about such things.
Diffraction is the limiting factor even for earth orbiting telescopes, atmospheric distortion wouldn't enter the equation until you were looking at much higher resolutions.
The equation for the relationship is given in the second link I posted, if you're interested.
Yes, that's right. There's no point in memorizing equations if you fail to grasp the underlying concepts. People who can memorize equations can earn degrees in fields which are not math related. Those who can't drop out, even though there is no real difference in ability because neither really understands the math. Moreover, it wasn't important to the field of study anyway.
Really it's poorly conceived. In the historical sense, people working out abstract figures on paper makes perfect sense, but today that's not how math works. It's an anachronism that does nothing to prepare people for math they might encounter in real life. It's more of a history lesson than anything.
Most students do not really understand mathematics anyway, they simply memorize equations and techniques. Why should students who can't manage that be barred from the higher levels in other courses?
Maybe, but the whole point of the App store is that it's supposed to be secure and safe for users. Sandboxing is a part of that security, even if lazy developers don't like it. The world has changed, people are expecting software to be written securely now, if developers can't come to grips with that, they're the ones who will be left out in the cold, not Apple.
I've been doing this for quite a while now. Between HULU and Netflix, you're pretty much covered. And you can watch whenever you want without needing to record shows on a DVR. Also, many shows are available on network websites.
I don't think it's unfair, you can always pay out dividends to your shareholders and give pay raises or bonuses to your employees. Cash is more liquid than stock anyway. And if you still want to gamble with it, you can always take the money and invest it yourself, or take it to vegas.
They don't mean that the traders are disciplined, they mean that companies being traded need to be disciplined or risk loosing all their value over trivial nonsense like rumors or a single bad quarter, or a change in direction that happens too quickly.
There is an allure in lower costs: cheaper tickets. And if airlines made a point of telling passengers how much less fuel was used on their flight, I'm sure there are plenty of people who would brag about it, the same way I brag about my car's fuel economy.
And really...if the women started making double entendre comments and the like...does anyone think the typical man entering that group would get upset in the least bit?
Anyone who would say this has probably never been subject to unwelcome comments of a sexual nature. It's really quite upsetting, to say the least.
You don't know what you're talking about. They never taxed any of those things. They were either banned outright, emissions were limited by regulations.
The word "cost" is meaningless without scarcity. Who cares if you unemployed if the cost of living is close to zero? It just means we won't have to work so much. But we'll have to restructure the way society works on a very fundamental level before that can realistically happen.
I was referring to liquid metal cooled fast reactors. It isn't clear at this point whether thorium reactors can achieve high enough breeding ratios to be viable.
In all fairness to the DOE, they did develop a breeder reactor system that could meet all of our energy needs for hundreds of years to come, and was passively cooled so that it could avoid the fukishima like meltdown problems the current generation of reactors suffer from. It was just politics that stopped it from being built on a larger scale.
Facebook avoiders are ridiculous. Do you honestly think the government doesn't have your picture? Or that advertisers can't figure out your demographic? Unless you literally live under a rock, off the grid and no one knows you, all you're succeeding at is being a troglodyte.
The parent is lamenting the fact that governments are moving more and more towards soft power as a means of control. Sure, they'll use the new tech to disappear a few people here and there, but most of us will never know about it because soft power will be sufficient to totally control us. The 1984 we were promised will never happen because, it turns out, people are more easily controlled than anybody had imagined.
Unfortunately, this is normal. That's why so many Americans have garages filled with junk that belongs in a landfill and end up on the show "Hoarders."
The reason we count both rapes and attempted rapes is because both count. The same way murder and attempted murder will land you in jail. Ignoring attempted rapes would understate the size of the actual problem. And I was correct about the claims made in the article. Regardless of any issues with that study, two have conducted since and reached the same conclusions. Whether or not you agree this is "rape" it is a huge problem, and not one we can solve by throwing all rapists in jail.
Slashdot Mirror
Therein lies the problem. To some extant, all definitions are subjective, and in giving this instruction the judge undoubtedly biased toward his own views. It would be better if the jury were already knowledgable about such things.
Diffraction is the limiting factor even for earth orbiting telescopes, atmospheric distortion wouldn't enter the equation until you were looking at much higher resolutions.
The equation for the relationship is given in the second link I posted, if you're interested.
Yes, that's right. There's no point in memorizing equations if you fail to grasp the underlying concepts. People who can memorize equations can earn degrees in fields which are not math related. Those who can't drop out, even though there is no real difference in ability because neither really understands the math. Moreover, it wasn't important to the field of study anyway.
1) Those NRO surveillance satellites which have been declassified are really big for something you'd send to the moon. You'd need to launch it on a Saturn5 or something similar to get it there.
2) Contemporary NRO operations are all classified, so we can only speculate about what would be possible.
Really it's poorly conceived. In the historical sense, people working out abstract figures on paper makes perfect sense, but today that's not how math works. It's an anachronism that does nothing to prepare people for math they might encounter in real life. It's more of a history lesson than anything.
Most students do not really understand mathematics anyway, they simply memorize equations and techniques. Why should students who can't manage that be barred from the higher levels in other courses?
I have plenty of wrinkles.
I agree with the general sentiment, but I still don't think we need scientists figuring out how to get rid of wrinkles.
Maybe, but the whole point of the App store is that it's supposed to be secure and safe for users. Sandboxing is a part of that security, even if lazy developers don't like it. The world has changed, people are expecting software to be written securely now, if developers can't come to grips with that, they're the ones who will be left out in the cold, not Apple.
I've been doing this for quite a while now. Between HULU and Netflix, you're pretty much covered. And you can watch whenever you want without needing to record shows on a DVR. Also, many shows are available on network websites.
I don't think it's unfair, you can always pay out dividends to your shareholders and give pay raises or bonuses to your employees. Cash is more liquid than stock anyway. And if you still want to gamble with it, you can always take the money and invest it yourself, or take it to vegas.
They don't mean that the traders are disciplined, they mean that companies being traded need to be disciplined or risk loosing all their value over trivial nonsense like rumors or a single bad quarter, or a change in direction that happens too quickly.
Sure we can, all we have do to is continue to hold the company privately.
There is an allure in lower costs: cheaper tickets. And if airlines made a point of telling passengers how much less fuel was used on their flight, I'm sure there are plenty of people who would brag about it, the same way I brag about my car's fuel economy.
Anyone who would say this has probably never been subject to unwelcome comments of a sexual nature. It's really quite upsetting, to say the least.
An emissions trading scheme is not a tax, it's just another way of setting a regulatory limit on emissions.
You don't know what you're talking about. They never taxed any of those things. They were either banned outright, emissions were limited by regulations.
The word "cost" is meaningless without scarcity. Who cares if you unemployed if the cost of living is close to zero? It just means we won't have to work so much. But we'll have to restructure the way society works on a very fundamental level before that can realistically happen.
I was referring to liquid metal cooled fast reactors. It isn't clear at this point whether thorium reactors can achieve high enough breeding ratios to be viable.
In all fairness to the DOE, they did develop a breeder reactor system that could meet all of our energy needs for hundreds of years to come, and was passively cooled so that it could avoid the fukishima like meltdown problems the current generation of reactors suffer from. It was just politics that stopped it from being built on a larger scale.
Facebook avoiders are ridiculous. Do you honestly think the government doesn't have your picture? Or that advertisers can't figure out your demographic? Unless you literally live under a rock, off the grid and no one knows you, all you're succeeding at is being a troglodyte.
The parent is lamenting the fact that governments are moving more and more towards soft power as a means of control. Sure, they'll use the new tech to disappear a few people here and there, but most of us will never know about it because soft power will be sufficient to totally control us. The 1984 we were promised will never happen because, it turns out, people are more easily controlled than anybody had imagined.
I don't see how not being on Facebook would have prevented it. Being her boyfriend, he'd have access to her other contact lists as well.
Unfortunately, this is normal. That's why so many Americans have garages filled with junk that belongs in a landfill and end up on the show "Hoarders."
The reason we count both rapes and attempted rapes is because both count. The same way murder and attempted murder will land you in jail. Ignoring attempted rapes would understate the size of the actual problem. And I was correct about the claims made in the article. Regardless of any issues with that study, two have conducted since and reached the same conclusions. Whether or not you agree this is "rape" it is a huge problem, and not one we can solve by throwing all rapists in jail.