It's the nature of punishment. If you throw someone in jail for ten years, they're out ten years of productive, happy life, but that cost doesn't get redistributed to the victims of their crime. If you have system where inmates are put to work, then the county's getting to pocket some free labour, but that's about it.
Some sort of backwards-ass sympathetic magic? You don't get picked to referee unless you're solid in your field, so there's an irrational fear that they'll stop being a big deal if they stop refereeing (even though refereeing is anonymous)?
In all seriousness, what the hell is the American middle class? Here in the UK it pretty much means you've got two employed adults or one adult in a high-paying, professional job and your big problems are all First World Problems. In the US media it seems to mean anything from a highly-paid expert consultant for space rockets to a family scraping together mortgage payments on an pile of 1970s drywall by taking on four part time jobs at the minimum wage.
Actually on further inspection it seems that this was electronically generated from sweeps of the Earth, and therefore they could've chosen any perspective they wanted, but the horizon distance in the image is correct for someone looking from 500 miles above that spot.
There's a lot of distortion in the image. The probe is only 500 miles above the Earth, so the probe can only see about 1700 miles in each direction before it reaches the horizon. They've basically presented the image as seen through a fish-eye lens.
Presumably they mean sites which fall within O2's web portal. For example, my mobile phone company's web portal can bring up my customer billing page without logging in, which indicates it's uniquely identifying me. It may be that they did something similar for AnnoyingInternetVidsAsRingtones.blah when visited through their web portal, to make it easier to bill people.
The USA PATRIOT act is small government? Corporate subsidies make for a free market? Open war leads to low deficits? The only difference between the democrats and the republicans is that the former want to control business and give to the people, and the latter want to control the people and give to business.
My point is that it pretty much by definition has to be a juvenile does-it-run-on-linux rant, if it's wedged in apropos of nothing to a conversation on a different topic.
It's not exactly relevant to the subject at hand, is it? His point is that it was really, really handy to be able to do that with Windows. Nobody even brought up Unix, or who did it first.
What the story doesn't mention is that the pcAnywhere source was nicked. It sounds like Symantec was aware of the weaknesses, and chose not to act until the source was stolen and the security weaknesses became public.
Just to make it clear, the act is called the "U.S.A. P.A.T.R.I.O.T. Act". It is an acronym. I know that under the British style guide, acronyms may be writtenas though they were proper nouns, but that is not appropriate here.
(1) An "astronomer" is a scientist that: (a) is in an astronomy department, (b) has sufficient publication output for his/her stature to overcome peer review so that he/she assumes an academic equilibrium, and (c) has completely filled the neighbourhood around his/her desk.
(2) A "dwarf astronomer" is a scientist that: (a) is in an astronomy department, (b) has sufficient publication output for his/her stature to overcome peer review so that he/she assumes an academic equilibrium, (c) has not completely filled the neighbourhood around his/her desk, and (d) is not a postdoc
(3) All other staff, except postdocs, in the astronomy department shall be referred to collectively as "Small Astronomy Department Bodies".
She's not a theorist, she's an experimentalist. It was an experimental study. The criticisms are, largely, on the quality of her experimental protocols.
Actually there's a lot of leeway in the chemical definition of DNA. It's heavily chemically modified by deliberate and accidental processes. If I wanted to be pedantic I would observe that it's still a nucleic acid based on a deoxyribose sugar and therefore has as much claim to being DNA as the canonical nucleotides.
The third problem: they refused to engage their critics. They simply stonewalled their peers. That's not how science is done. Compare it to the OPERA neutrino study, which was an equally hyped and unlikely claim, but the authors openly solicited rebuttals.
the higher pressure means higher temperatures. PV=T and all that regardless of gaseous makeup.
Yes, if you compress a gas its temperature will increase. However it will then lose that heat. Making a gas dense doesn't magically allow it to maintain an elevated temperature.
Not exactly, Apple's claim was that they were the first to offer video chat that people would actually use.
We must have been watching a different conference, because they were laying it on pretty thick that The Jetsons was finally here, and that it was nothing anyone had seen before.
Slashdot Mirror
That is, actually, quite ironic. "I have a surplus of flatware, yet not one piece of it is appropriate to the task at hand!".
It's the nature of punishment. If you throw someone in jail for ten years, they're out ten years of productive, happy life, but that cost doesn't get redistributed to the victims of their crime. If you have system where inmates are put to work, then the county's getting to pocket some free labour, but that's about it.
Some sort of backwards-ass sympathetic magic? You don't get picked to referee unless you're solid in your field, so there's an irrational fear that they'll stop being a big deal if they stop refereeing (even though refereeing is anonymous)?
So, "middle class" is basically anyone who isn't flat broke or a millionaire?
In all seriousness, what the hell is the American middle class? Here in the UK it pretty much means you've got two employed adults or one adult in a high-paying, professional job and your big problems are all First World Problems. In the US media it seems to mean anything from a highly-paid expert consultant for space rockets to a family scraping together mortgage payments on an pile of 1970s drywall by taking on four part time jobs at the minimum wage.
Actually on further inspection it seems that this was electronically generated from sweeps of the Earth, and therefore they could've chosen any perspective they wanted, but the horizon distance in the image is correct for someone looking from 500 miles above that spot.
There's a lot of distortion in the image. The probe is only 500 miles above the Earth, so the probe can only see about 1700 miles in each direction before it reaches the horizon. They've basically presented the image as seen through a fish-eye lens.
O2 belongs to Telefonica these days.
It was corrected at 2pm yesterday according to one of the stories linked to in the summary.
Presumably they mean sites which fall within O2's web portal. For example, my mobile phone company's web portal can bring up my customer billing page without logging in, which indicates it's uniquely identifying me. It may be that they did something similar for AnnoyingInternetVidsAsRingtones.blah when visited through their web portal, to make it easier to bill people.
The USA PATRIOT act is small government? Corporate subsidies make for a free market? Open war leads to low deficits? The only difference between the democrats and the republicans is that the former want to control business and give to the people, and the latter want to control the people and give to business.
Well, that must've been very nice for you.
My point is that it pretty much by definition has to be a juvenile does-it-run-on-linux rant, if it's wedged in apropos of nothing to a conversation on a different topic.
It's not exactly relevant to the subject at hand, is it? His point is that it was really, really handy to be able to do that with Windows. Nobody even brought up Unix, or who did it first.
What the story doesn't mention is that the pcAnywhere source was nicked. It sounds like Symantec was aware of the weaknesses, and chose not to act until the source was stolen and the security weaknesses became public.
http://www.channelregister.co.uk/2012/01/18/symantec_leak_latest/
Just to make it clear, the act is called the "U.S.A. P.A.T.R.I.O.T. Act". It is an acronym. I know that under the British style guide, acronyms may be writtenas though they were proper nouns, but that is not appropriate here.
The best bet would be to take a PC and use console commands to set a very wide FOV. 180 degrees, I suppose, given the dome's shape.
(1) An "astronomer" is a scientist that: (a) is in an astronomy department, (b) has sufficient publication output for his/her stature to overcome peer review so that he/she assumes an academic equilibrium, and (c) has completely filled the neighbourhood around his/her desk.
(2) A "dwarf astronomer" is a scientist that: (a) is in an astronomy department, (b) has sufficient publication output for his/her stature to overcome peer review so that he/she assumes an academic equilibrium, (c) has not completely filled the neighbourhood around his/her desk, and (d) is not a postdoc
(3) All other staff, except postdocs, in the astronomy department shall be referred to collectively as "Small Astronomy Department Bodies".
She's not a theorist, she's an experimentalist. It was an experimental study. The criticisms are, largely, on the quality of her experimental protocols.
Actually there's a lot of leeway in the chemical definition of DNA. It's heavily chemically modified by deliberate and accidental processes. If I wanted to be pedantic I would observe that it's still a nucleic acid based on a deoxyribose sugar and therefore has as much claim to being DNA as the canonical nucleotides.
You wouldn't, though.
The third problem: they refused to engage their critics. They simply stonewalled their peers. That's not how science is done. Compare it to the OPERA neutrino study, which was an equally hyped and unlikely claim, but the authors openly solicited rebuttals.
the higher pressure means higher temperatures. PV=T and all that regardless of gaseous makeup.
Yes, if you compress a gas its temperature will increase. However it will then lose that heat. Making a gas dense doesn't magically allow it to maintain an elevated temperature.
Not exactly, Apple's claim was that they were the first to offer video chat that people would actually use.
We must have been watching a different conference, because they were laying it on pretty thick that The Jetsons was finally here, and that it was nothing anyone had seen before.
Jinx.