Yeah right, tell that to the people of London, Dresden, Hiroshima, Manchester, Nagasaki, Auschwitz, etc, etc, the only reason Paris was spared was because Hitler valued the architecture and wanted to keep it intact.
Targeting civilian centers is not exactly targeting civilians but I will concede this point. I just do not remember the Nazi's or the Japs marching into a town and killing everything that moved which was sort of what I was thinking when I mean targeting civilians, Perhaps something like Sherman's march to the sea except taking the populations out with it.
Even the most bloody wars (such as the English civil war) kill less than 5% of the population, OTOH the black plague regularly killed ~50% or more of the people in the cities/regions it infected. People who survived the plague had a brief period of high living standards due to all the abandon property lying around.
Actually, the body count was similar if you count actual deaths and not as a percentage of the population.They estimate that is you count all the disease and famine associated with WWII that upwards of 80 million people died where as the black plague killed 75-200 million and they both reportedly were around 7 years long. But the population was just a lot higher. That would likely make another plague outbreak a lot more deadly so I again concede this point to you. But the only reason I brought up using the military is because the parent did.
As a science based "greenie" my "agenda" is to be a part of a sustainable, peaceful, disease free species. Wars, plagues, and mass starvation are what I want to avoid. Science and common sense tell me that the main factor in obtaining what I want (for my 3 grandkids) is population. There's plenty of evidence we can achieve humane population control by educating and allowing women to control their bodies, and providing security of living standards in old age.
And I'm glad you are a reasonable greenie but as I said, they are out there who think the world is over populated and they are in some influential positions. Ted Turner is probably the most notable one I know of who at one time attempted to offer free birth control to poor neighborhoods and African countries because that is where the population explosions were coming from. In fact, one of the problems with aids in Africa stems from the fact that there are urban legends about people not wanting them to reproduce and their own or waring governments practicing Eugenics (forced sterilization of their enemies, sometimes with airborne chemicals) so condom usage is very suspect and extremely low in practice. People like the director of the U.N. Population Division, John Wilmoth, expects the world to meet Africa's birth control or need for family planning and warns that because of global warming and crap.. So we need to stop Africans from breeding I guess.
Or we can continue to behave like fermenting yeast, expanding to consume our available resources and killing each other for access to untapped/unguarded resources (territory, water, food). AGW is the #1 mid (and long) term threat on the pentagon's list of threats to global stability and it has been that way for almost a decade. The reason is that AGW will dramatically change the current (territory, water, food) map, and it will do so this century - even if we all stop emitting GHGs today.
Or we can create machines that capture carbon from the air and run them all over the world and we will not have to worry about AGW. That's the problem I have, people are more than willing to give up freedoms, to surrender other people's freedoms and way of life, often at the point of a gun (government law or even "armies" as the GP suggested) and in ways that create duress and hardships for others in the name of global warming but they will not consider geo-engineering l
What makes you think CO2 emmisions need to be zero or as close to it as possible?
All it needs to be is to a rate that sequestration, either artificial or natural, can regulate the atmospheric concentrations to acceptable levels. That does not need to be zero emmisions.
It only takes a few good armies to depopulate the world by 35%. The total related death toll of WWII seems around 4% and no one was really targeting the civilian population as a matter of intent.
That would fix the problem too. I bring it up because if we are going to use armies to force our will onto others, the tactics used will largely bent to the will. There are a lot of enviromentalist who think the world is over populated and as long as armies are going to be used- well, just saying..
Yup. They should have as much privacy as any home owner, car owner, anyone who has been party of a court case, holds a business license, contributes to political actions in the state of california and i'm sure a lot of other activities subject to public records searches.
But seeing how domain names are often treated like property, i'm not sure why it isn't expected to be treated a lot like property.
I'm currious. Are there any instances of concealed carry holders being shot by the police when carrying their weapon or not?
It just seems to me that should happen more often than news reports indicate if shooting innocent unarmed people is as common as it is portreyed. Oh, i'm not disputing that it happens and i certainly believe we have coward cops who will shoot first and ask questions later. I just do not think it is as systemic as it is claimed.
Are you sure it is only delaying it? A lot of crimes are crimes of oppertunity where the conditions if changed slightly, the oppertunity changes also.
For instance, someone may be tempted to reach in a car with an open window and snatch a purse off the seat if no one is around. 20 minutes later, people might be around, the car may be gone, the owner may have came back and removed the purse or locked the car up. Same kind of goes for some violent crimed, 20 minutes later someone might not be as pissed off or thought about the consequences a bit and not be inclined to stab that guy who cut in from of them at the bank or whatever.
Sure, there will be crime that people look for the oppertunity to commit. Those will just be delayed but there are some that will not happen at all if delayed.
Now claims that the FCC legally defined the term broad band internet based on speeds.
The section you listed did not define broadband specifically, it renumbered section 8.11 to read as 8.2 in the law (which is unconstitutional) and restates the law verbatim.
The interesting part here is that I cannot find the official release of when they voted to change the definition of broadband for the speeds. The vote happened jan 29 of this year but I cannot find the report/disclosure on it. So maybe it has been redefined again or maybe the FCC's order for the definition based on speed is still in the works or something.
I have seen a lawyer actually argue both sides of an issue in court. The lawyer described someone as almost indigent with no money and a bum who recklessly spent his money on crap, booze, and motorcycles in the beginning and in the end was saying he was the primary bread winner of the family and the loss of his income was devastating to her Client.
I have no doubt they would do something like that and I have no doubt that the client wouldn't care one bit if they thought it would get them what they wanted. However, I think it would be more like "Your Honor, the legal definition of broadband internet service is higher then our client's current service offerings meet therefore they do not fall under those rules and request a summery dismissal".
But yes, in essence, they would be saying the same thing.
Only if you consume the starchy stuff at a rate as slow as consuming the amount of water you are intended to put it in
Possibly but likely not. The problem or possible stumbling block is that the body doesn't take up the alcohol equally and has gag reflexes if too much is detected. I'm not aware of this powdered stuff defeating any of that.
Anyways, the stomach is very poor in absorbing alcohol where the intestines are much more efficiency. I forget the actually percent, but I believe its 80% or better of the alcohol is absorbed by the intestines rather than the stomach. Now, if you have ever eaten before or during drinking you will find you don't get as drunk as quickly as if you started drinking on an empty stomach. This is because the stomach determined food is present and processes it before allowing it to pass to the intestines. It locks the alcohol into the less efficient system until such time the stomach releases the food and then the intestines will absorb quickly.
It's also why in most states, there is a time limit between getting pulled for a DUI and when they give biological tests to determine the exact levels (breath or blood or urine or whatever is in vogue now) even though most areas ignore the time limit and if a cop asks if you have anything to eat, some will likely fumble around past the time limit in order to ensure your stomach releases and you have absorbed more alcohol into your system.
Sorry about that tangent, but the starch will likely lock the stomach up like food would where the water or liquid would pass through in a shorter period of time. So in essence, it will likely either be the same as if you ate something or quicker with the liquid as it passes through to where it can be absorbed more readily. You may however, avoid the gag reflex with the powdered stuff until the body actually absorbs it and actually consume more without knowing it which is where I suspect one of the concerns might be.
And no, that is not a complete theory of operation and I am not a PHD or anything, I just studied ways to get drunk faster years ago in college. There may be flaws in my understanding but the principles of the operation should be close enough for layman's terms.
But I can see some mad wizardry going on there too. Offer at least one actual broadband offering at a high price and lots of "not broadband" offerings at reasonable prices.
Sadly, you forgot to provide the other portions of the rules that say
A person engaged in the provision of broadband Internet access service,
It's in all three rules. Now the interesting part is that the FCC also just changed the legal definition of broadband to be 25 meg down and 3 meg up. So your 11meg connections which seems to be a popular choice with cable internet will/might not be subject to the rules.
Because half the public or more is confused and think it is a law passed by congress when it is only a regulation promoted by a government agency independent of congress. You can tell this by how many people refer to the regulation and/or rule making process as a bill being passed.
In that light, they expect the bills to be available after each house has voted on them and once it is signed into law. None of that happened because it was not an act of congress- it was a government agency deciding all of the sudden it had specific legal jurisdiction over something that it had been rejecting that same principle jurrisdiction since the 1970's.
I have trouble figuring out just how an ISP can do actual harm to me when it's my choice to pay them or not for their service. If I don't like the deal they're offering, I don't pay them.
If you have no other option for broadband and your requirements are broadband, then you are harmed either by the actions of the ISP or by the lack of an ISP when you decide not to pay them.
Second, you credit the FCC for not harming people in the same way you might credit a robber for not shooting a clerk for cooperating during a robbery. It's the threat of violence that's a problem. Same thing goes for countries that lack first amendment style protections. Few are actually physically harmed. They're just too afraid to speak. They opt out of discussions the government doesn't approve of.
Well, since most broadband is already piggybacked into homes on existing infrastructure that the title 2 regulation put in place, you can say that the FCC created the mess that people are wanting fixed by title 2 regulation in the first place. Now they are claiming that by giving them more power under title 2 regulation, they can fix that.
Here is an interesting thought exercise though. The rules I have bothered reading so far say
A person engaged in the provision of broadband Internet access service
The interesting thing is the FCC just recently redefined the speeds of officially defined broadband to 25m down and 3m up. If any portion of the connection doesn't meet or exceed that, it's not broadband as far as the federal government and FCC is concerned. What if the ISPs redefine their offerings as 24/3 or 50/2.5 up and down respectfully. That would suggest that all this new regulation could be avoided if they simply didn't offer "broadband".
This isn't really at the driver level yet. It's at the bios level where the OS can configure the devices to some degrees. The ACPI (Advanced Configuration and Power Interface ) level dictates the revision to be used in allowing the kernel to change settings and the level of control. It's basically why you do not have to go into the bios and change settings to resolve IRQ or DMA conflicts or worse, crap open the case and flip jumpers anymore.
If the spec level is implemented properly, the bios will default to a non-conflicting configuration and all most drivers will need to do is query that configuration and use it. In some cases, such as workarounds for sound cards, the IRQ and DMA will need to be changed and the APCI level will dictate how and what can be changed. As stated by the article, in Dell machines the sound hardware is left in a misconfiguration state which would require the driver to explicitly use the APCI spec to make it useful to the user under linux.
But it's way more useful then that. The brightness of a monitor for instance is controlled via the ACPI interface so you don't have to set it in the bios. In the article, the author claims that HP machines report fewer brightness levels for the back light of the LCD screen.
However, the author thinks this is by design and intended to sabotage the linux installs. I'm thinking it may be more likely that they just do not put enough effort into the levels that are not commonly used and allow bugs to persist. Of course it could be a malicious firmware author who is upset over having to make this stuff for linux and sabotaging it. It's hard to tell at this point.
What, he said. And everyone should just drive a Volkswagen or Ford Pinto (or model T) and they should be all the same color because you having a choice is not a concern.
But it appears this problem, if the author of the story is correct, is not in effort making linux like windows, it's in making linux act like windows in order to avoid deliberate sabotage from the firmware. So if we wanted to make your statement a little more correct with the actual situation, it shoudl go something like this.
So much work to sabotage linux with the workarounds on the path that leads to it just being Windows.
You don't think there is fine manual detail measuring, plotting, and drafting the parts and then formting it in ways not only the printer can understand but also produce in a way without loxking up lower levels of the parts before they are finished?
I mean the story is about a lot more than pressing print and loading a feeder.
It really depends on what you mean by work. If you connect this to an engine with the drive wheels off the ground so it can freespin, you could very well run it through the gears and all for quite some time before catastrophic damage. So working in the rawest essence of turning the input shaft and selecting gears would result in corect output shaft rotation, is true. Its just not a replacement for an actual application like transfering engine power to the ground.
I can see this being useful in a fab shop (souping up 4x4s or prototyping alternative vehicle designs) or more likely, from a teaching perspective where it may be cheaper to demonstrate and allow student practice before using real parts. But outside of that, biulding a model that detailed and accurate just to say you can has long been a hoby of many people. Remember all those ships kn a bottle? Same vein or challenge. The ones that got the rigging of the sails the most accurate were really fascinating.
Because his wife is involved and anything making more productive and less stressed is good for him. Plus, there the chance of more sex if that is achieved. So quit hating and help a brother get laid.
That'd a good way to get otherwise reasonable people to pass laws like this and worse "in the memory of". Its about the same with threats because with their armed state police or secret service guards at their side, they will want to prove you cannot intimidate them with threats.
Cannot say it will work but i had a similar experience with a VPN connection to the office once. I probably misconfigured something but i had to change the MAC address an IP addtess in linux yo something other than what was in windows and the connection worked.
If course you don't physically change the MAC address as its hardcoded to thr NIC. But in you networking setup, you should be able to designate a different address for the networking stack to use. In my case, the DHCP in the router assigned the same IP to the MAC address leased when windows was used. I do not know which made it work or if both were needed as i stopped futzing with it once it worked.
Might be worth a try if you haven't already tried it.
Well, we can argue about it and not exploe his suggestion. I'm sure that will get it fixed quickly.
Oh, and i'm pretty sure he explained the problem which has to do with drawing two frames at the same time or something like that unless there is a new problem.
Slashdot Mirror
Targeting civilian centers is not exactly targeting civilians but I will concede this point. I just do not remember the Nazi's or the Japs marching into a town and killing everything that moved which was sort of what I was thinking when I mean targeting civilians, Perhaps something like Sherman's march to the sea except taking the populations out with it.
Actually, the body count was similar if you count actual deaths and not as a percentage of the population.They estimate that is you count all the disease and famine associated with WWII that upwards of 80 million people died where as the black plague killed 75-200 million and they both reportedly were around 7 years long. But the population was just a lot higher. That would likely make another plague outbreak a lot more deadly so I again concede this point to you. But the only reason I brought up using the military is because the parent did.
And I'm glad you are a reasonable greenie but as I said, they are out there who think the world is over populated and they are in some influential positions. Ted Turner is probably the most notable one I know of who at one time attempted to offer free birth control to poor neighborhoods and African countries because that is where the population explosions were coming from. In fact, one of the problems with aids in Africa stems from the fact that there are urban legends about people not wanting them to reproduce and their own or waring governments practicing Eugenics (forced sterilization of their enemies, sometimes with airborne chemicals) so condom usage is very suspect and extremely low in practice. People like the director of the U.N. Population Division, John Wilmoth, expects the world to meet Africa's birth control or need for family planning and warns that because of global warming and crap.. So we need to stop Africans from breeding I guess.
Or we can create machines that capture carbon from the air and run them all over the world and we will not have to worry about AGW. That's the problem I have, people are more than willing to give up freedoms, to surrender other people's freedoms and way of life, often at the point of a gun (government law or even "armies" as the GP suggested) and in ways that create duress and hardships for others in the name of global warming but they will not consider geo-engineering l
What makes you think CO2 emmisions need to be zero or as close to it as possible?
All it needs to be is to a rate that sequestration, either artificial or natural, can regulate the atmospheric concentrations to acceptable levels. That does not need to be zero emmisions.
What makes you think he hasn't alteady investef in those?
It only takes a few good armies to depopulate the world by 35%. The total related death toll of WWII seems around 4% and no one was really targeting the civilian population as a matter of intent.
That would fix the problem too. I bring it up because if we are going to use armies to force our will onto others, the tactics used will largely bent to the will. There are a lot of enviromentalist who think the world is over populated and as long as armies are going to be used- well, just saying..
Yup. They should have as much privacy as any home owner, car owner, anyone who has been party of a court case, holds a business license, contributes to political actions in the state of california and i'm sure a lot of other activities subject to public records searches.
But seeing how domain names are often treated like property, i'm not sure why it isn't expected to be treated a lot like property.
I'm currious. Are there any instances of concealed carry holders being shot by the police when carrying their weapon or not?
It just seems to me that should happen more often than news reports indicate if shooting innocent unarmed people is as common as it is portreyed. Oh, i'm not disputing that it happens and i certainly believe we have coward cops who will shoot first and ask questions later. I just do not think it is as systemic as it is claimed.
Are you sure it is only delaying it? A lot of crimes are crimes of oppertunity where the conditions if changed slightly, the oppertunity changes also.
For instance, someone may be tempted to reach in a car with an open window and snatch a purse off the seat if no one is around. 20 minutes later, people might be around, the car may be gone, the owner may have came back and removed the purse or locked the car up. Same kind of goes for some violent crimed, 20 minutes later someone might not be as pissed off or thought about the consequences a bit and not be inclined to stab that guy who cut in from of them at the bank or whatever.
Sure, there will be crime that people look for the oppertunity to commit. Those will just be delayed but there are some that will not happen at all if delayed.
Try looking here.
http://www.engadget.com/2015/0...
Now claims that the FCC legally defined the term broad band internet based on speeds.
The section you listed did not define broadband specifically, it renumbered section 8.11 to read as 8.2 in the law (which is unconstitutional) and restates the law verbatim.
The interesting part here is that I cannot find the official release of when they voted to change the definition of broadband for the speeds. The vote happened jan 29 of this year but I cannot find the report/disclosure on it. So maybe it has been redefined again or maybe the FCC's order for the definition based on speed is still in the works or something.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/cf...
I have seen a lawyer actually argue both sides of an issue in court. The lawyer described someone as almost indigent with no money and a bum who recklessly spent his money on crap, booze, and motorcycles in the beginning and in the end was saying he was the primary bread winner of the family and the loss of his income was devastating to her Client.
I have no doubt they would do something like that and I have no doubt that the client wouldn't care one bit if they thought it would get them what they wanted. However, I think it would be more like "Your Honor, the legal definition of broadband internet service is higher then our client's current service offerings meet therefore they do not fall under those rules and request a summery dismissal".
But yes, in essence, they would be saying the same thing.
Possibly but likely not. The problem or possible stumbling block is that the body doesn't take up the alcohol equally and has gag reflexes if too much is detected. I'm not aware of this powdered stuff defeating any of that.
Anyways, the stomach is very poor in absorbing alcohol where the intestines are much more efficiency. I forget the actually percent, but I believe its 80% or better of the alcohol is absorbed by the intestines rather than the stomach. Now, if you have ever eaten before or during drinking you will find you don't get as drunk as quickly as if you started drinking on an empty stomach. This is because the stomach determined food is present and processes it before allowing it to pass to the intestines. It locks the alcohol into the less efficient system until such time the stomach releases the food and then the intestines will absorb quickly.
It's also why in most states, there is a time limit between getting pulled for a DUI and when they give biological tests to determine the exact levels (breath or blood or urine or whatever is in vogue now) even though most areas ignore the time limit and if a cop asks if you have anything to eat, some will likely fumble around past the time limit in order to ensure your stomach releases and you have absorbed more alcohol into your system.
Sorry about that tangent, but the starch will likely lock the stomach up like food would where the water or liquid would pass through in a shorter period of time. So in essence, it will likely either be the same as if you ate something or quicker with the liquid as it passes through to where it can be absorbed more readily. You may however, avoid the gag reflex with the powdered stuff until the body actually absorbs it and actually consume more without knowing it which is where I suspect one of the concerns might be.
And no, that is not a complete theory of operation and I am not a PHD or anything, I just studied ways to get drunk faster years ago in college. There may be flaws in my understanding but the principles of the operation should be close enough for layman's terms.
It likely could.
But I can see some mad wizardry going on there too. Offer at least one actual broadband offering at a high price and lots of "not broadband" offerings at reasonable prices.
I'm not sure this is over just yet.
Sadly, you forgot to provide the other portions of the rules that say
It's in all three rules. Now the interesting part is that the FCC also just changed the legal definition of broadband to be 25 meg down and 3 meg up. So your 11meg connections which seems to be a popular choice with cable internet will/might not be subject to the rules.
Because half the public or more is confused and think it is a law passed by congress when it is only a regulation promoted by a government agency independent of congress. You can tell this by how many people refer to the regulation and/or rule making process as a bill being passed.
In that light, they expect the bills to be available after each house has voted on them and once it is signed into law. None of that happened because it was not an act of congress- it was a government agency deciding all of the sudden it had specific legal jurisdiction over something that it had been rejecting that same principle jurrisdiction since the 1970's.
If you have no other option for broadband and your requirements are broadband, then you are harmed either by the actions of the ISP or by the lack of an ISP when you decide not to pay them.
Well, since most broadband is already piggybacked into homes on existing infrastructure that the title 2 regulation put in place, you can say that the FCC created the mess that people are wanting fixed by title 2 regulation in the first place. Now they are claiming that by giving them more power under title 2 regulation, they can fix that.
Here is an interesting thought exercise though. The rules I have bothered reading so far say
The interesting thing is the FCC just recently redefined the speeds of officially defined broadband to 25m down and 3m up. If any portion of the connection doesn't meet or exceed that, it's not broadband as far as the federal government and FCC is concerned. What if the ISPs redefine their offerings as 24/3 or 50/2.5 up and down respectfully. That would suggest that all this new regulation could be avoided if they simply didn't offer "broadband".
This isn't really at the driver level yet. It's at the bios level where the OS can configure the devices to some degrees. The ACPI (Advanced Configuration and Power Interface ) level dictates the revision to be used in allowing the kernel to change settings and the level of control. It's basically why you do not have to go into the bios and change settings to resolve IRQ or DMA conflicts or worse, crap open the case and flip jumpers anymore.
If the spec level is implemented properly, the bios will default to a non-conflicting configuration and all most drivers will need to do is query that configuration and use it. In some cases, such as workarounds for sound cards, the IRQ and DMA will need to be changed and the APCI level will dictate how and what can be changed. As stated by the article, in Dell machines the sound hardware is left in a misconfiguration state which would require the driver to explicitly use the APCI spec to make it useful to the user under linux.
But it's way more useful then that. The brightness of a monitor for instance is controlled via the ACPI interface so you don't have to set it in the bios. In the article, the author claims that HP machines report fewer brightness levels for the back light of the LCD screen.
However, the author thinks this is by design and intended to sabotage the linux installs. I'm thinking it may be more likely that they just do not put enough effort into the levels that are not commonly used and allow bugs to persist. Of course it could be a malicious firmware author who is upset over having to make this stuff for linux and sabotaging it. It's hard to tell at this point.
What, he said. And everyone should just drive a Volkswagen or Ford Pinto (or model T) and they should be all the same color because you having a choice is not a concern.
But it appears this problem, if the author of the story is correct, is not in effort making linux like windows, it's in making linux act like windows in order to avoid deliberate sabotage from the firmware. So if we wanted to make your statement a little more correct with the actual situation, it shoudl go something like this.
You don't think there is fine manual detail measuring, plotting, and drafting the parts and then formting it in ways not only the printer can understand but also produce in a way without loxking up lower levels of the parts before they are finished?
I mean the story is about a lot more than pressing print and loading a feeder.
I guess we should just stay off the sidewalks then.
It really depends on what you mean by work. If you connect this to an engine with the drive wheels off the ground so it can freespin, you could very well run it through the gears and all for quite some time before catastrophic damage. So working in the rawest essence of turning the input shaft and selecting gears would result in corect output shaft rotation, is true. Its just not a replacement for an actual application like transfering engine power to the ground.
I can see this being useful in a fab shop (souping up 4x4s or prototyping alternative vehicle designs) or more likely, from a teaching perspective where it may be cheaper to demonstrate and allow student practice before using real parts. But outside of that, biulding a model that detailed and accurate just to say you can has long been a hoby of many people. Remember all those ships kn a bottle? Same vein or challenge. The ones that got the rigging of the sails the most accurate were really fascinating.
Because his wife is involved and anything making more productive and less stressed is good for him. Plus, there the chance of more sex if that is achieved. So quit hating and help a brother get laid.
That'd a good way to get otherwise reasonable people to pass laws like this and worse "in the memory of". Its about the same with threats because with their armed state police or secret service guards at their side, they will want to prove you cannot intimidate them with threats.
Commodity hardware means you can upgrade it instead of buying a new console- at least for a while.
Cannot say it will work but i had a similar experience with a VPN connection to the office once. I probably misconfigured something but i had to change the MAC address an IP addtess in linux yo something other than what was in windows and the connection worked.
If course you don't physically change the MAC address as its hardcoded to thr NIC. But in you networking setup, you should be able to designate a different address for the networking stack to use. In my case, the DHCP in the router assigned the same IP to the MAC address leased when windows was used. I do not know which made it work or if both were needed as i stopped futzing with it once it worked.
Might be worth a try if you haven't already tried it.
Well, we can argue about it and not exploe his suggestion. I'm sure that will get it fixed quickly.
Oh, and i'm pretty sure he explained the problem which has to do with drawing two frames at the same time or something like that unless there is a new problem.
You thinking about medicated underwear?
Double thr size.... hm....