Maybe it's me, but I thought light behaving as both a particle and a wave was a quantum state. And that quantum state exists until the system is observed and then it collapses into one of two possibilities. Looking that the picture in the link, and...I guess that's not what I was expecting. What am I missing here, physicists? Is the light particle/wave thing not a quantum thing? If it is, that picture doesn't seem like it describes both at once. It almost seems too...cartoony.
From my limited understanding, it appears the photo is showing the particle while showing the effects of the wave on the wire. If light particles were rocks, we are seeing a photo of the rock sinking to the bottom of a pond at the same time we are seeing the water being disturbed by waves. In other words, we aren't seeing the light as a wave, only the wavelike effects on another object.
Nothing wrong with a little tidal power but just looking at the geography it will never be a significant source of power.
Another problem is the cost. The prices listed in the summary are very expensive electricity... and those are the lowball figures used to get the project approved, not the "real" numbers. Offshore wind would be cheaper, and have far less environmental impact.
As an traditional power plant engineer, offshore wind costs seem staggeringly high to me. A 90m (300ft) tall tower in the middle of the ocean supporting a nacelle that weighs about 520 metric tons (1.15 million pounds) doesn't come cheap. Have you seen rate sheets for the cranes that are needed to assemble these turbines? On land, they average in the tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars per day.
At sea, with the need for a large vessel and all the crew that a large vessel requires to keep it operating, the cost is staggering. I spent a couple weeks aboard the Tolteca, a Mexican heavy-lift ship with a 2000 ton crane and a crew of about 250. Even using labor from the developing world, the costs are astronomical. We invoiced them millions of dollars of work and they didn't even blink. An offshore supply boat rents out (in good oil-boom times, maybe not right now) for hundreds of thousands of dollars per day. A heavy crane ship is probably in the millions per day. That's just for erecting the wind turbine, which is probably at least a 24 hour lift. You also need specialized vessels to lay high voltage cable across the sea floor. Adding "marine" or "offshore" to the name of anything is an excellent way to multiply the cost by at least 3.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tidal_barrage suggests fish mortality is quite high with this method. Considering estuaries are typically fish breeding grounds, If the alternative wasn't nuclear I'd say it wasn't worth the risk to an already depleted ecosystem.
There are a very limited number of places on earth where tidal dam power works. Power output scales linearly with height difference. This map shows the tidal range all over the world. Combine that with a need for a bay or inlet that can be dammed without impacting commerce or the environment, and the list of places tidal power can be used shrinks dramatically. Remember, you need a bay or cove that is large enough to be worthwhile for making power, but not so large that it is economically important. And also not in an environmentally sensitive area.
Nothing wrong with a little tidal power but just looking at the geography it will never be a significant source of power.
It's already happened in America. Most manufacturing jobs have either become automated or outsourced. Most people work in the service industry. Same thing will happen in China.
I work at a facility with a large number of CNC machines making high tech stainless parts. Usually someone has to reverse engineer the old part. Someone has to draw parts in solidworks. Someone has to figure out what size the raw material has to be cut to, before it goes into the CNC. Someone has to load material into the CNC and know how to position it and run the machine. Someone has to order raw material. Someone has to be out trying to find customers. Someone has to make the raw materials at a vendor. Someone has to drive the trucks that deliver raw materials and take away finished goods. The actual cutting of metal might be automated but there are plenty of related jobs which are not.
Or any other instrument. I bought a $150 banjo, a $12 electronic tuner, and a $15 book (ISBN 978-1883206444) about 5 weeks ago. I've only had time to put in about 8 sessions of 30-60 minutes but that's all it took to start sounding somewhat good. I was concerned I would annoy my wife to death but the banjo sounds good even in the hands of a beginner.
Nearly one third of my 900+ games on Steam not enough for you?
Hell, the thing isn't even out yet and already it's prompted hundreds of developers to release their games on Linux too.
Video games are not a commodity like brown sugar. There may be slight differences between brown sugar manufacturers but 99% of people aren't going to notice. There may be "open world third person shooter with grappling hooks" games available for Linux, but I don't want to play "open world third person shooter with grappling hooks", I want to play Just Cause 2. If Just Cause 2 isn't in that 1/3 of games that Linux supports, then no, the progress on games for Linux isn't enough for me.
For me local game streaming effectively kills the notion of the SteamBox. Why have multiple powerful expensive PCs when you can have one and a $99 low power ARM box attached to your TV.
Have you actually tried to use the streaming regularly? For me, the input lag is significant enough to make it a nonstarter. There are a lot of little quirks too. I'm very happy they added the feature, but it isn't usuable for some games.
Use some sort of market rate. If there's a lot of supply, but not a lot of demand at a given moment, the price drops.
That's pretty much what we have now in many areas of the US (not all). It is called Locational Marginal Pricing, or LMP. You can see various realtime pricing maps by searching Google for "LMP map". Here's one of them.
The problem is that the people advocating for "net metering", AKA "I want to sell my power at full retail rates", don't want to pay to keep the grid maintained. The LMP price is wholesale. Getting that power to where it is needed requires transmission lines, and transmission lines need maintenance and have a basically fixed capacity. Therefore, there are real costs involved in transporting electricity from where it is generated, to where it is needed. "Net metering" is a fancy way of saying that you don't want to pay those costs.
You are more than welcome to run an extension cable to your neighbor, but if people want to sell to the grid, they need to accept that the grid costs money to maintain, and demanding that utilities pay retail rates for wholesale electricity isn't going to happen.
Were your ideas relevant 10 years ago? Or did you perceive some problems which are only becoming relevant now?
Maybe he invented a "better way to do things", which was ignored for some time because changing would have required breaking the inertia of proven technologies. Then when companies today are trying to shave 0.2s from boot times, or improve performance by 3%, they see the value in doing things differently. I could easily see that happening.
That was a long time ago. Google has ignored that line the minute they became a publicly traded company. Every decision they make is how to benefit their stockholders.
Oh really? Because it sounds like they are basically shutting out the adult industry from their Blogger platform. If they wanted to maximize money, they would analyze adult content and serve up relevent ads, the same as any other industry. Budweiser certainly doesn't have a problem with selling alcohol to strip clubs. Johnson & Johnson doesn't take offense when adult stores stock K-Y Jelly. Google's business is analyzing data and serving up ads. Not leveraging a specific type of data to make money, for seemingly moral reasons, doesn't strike me as benefiting the stockholders.
If people weren't so set on getting Free Shit, this wouldn't be a problem.
But it seems a lot of people think they have a RIGHT to listen to music, created by others for the purpose of selling and providing an income, for FREE.
Look at all the bitching and moaning that happens on Slashdot about how shit should be free. Fuck You. Shit cost money to make and distribute and you fuckers should be paying for it.
Paid music is a relatively recent innovation. Back in the day, people made music for fun, without pay. Then we went through a period where the very wealthy financed music, either by paying musicians a salary to hang around with the King and play things on request, or by wealthy individuals commissioning music to be written.
The concept of the average Joe paying for music is only about as old as devices which could record and play back music. In addition, this time period almost completely overlaps with the time period in which we had free broadcast radio, where you could just pay a 1-time fee for some hardware and listen to the radio with no additional costs.
Hahahahahaha! $4.99/month for what is little better than radio, (which as far as I know is still free,)...
Satellite radio (SiriusXM) packages start at $9.99/month and go up to $18.99/month. If you want to listen to Howard Stern, or any sports, or their up to the minute traffic and weather, or get any of the 70 stations not included with the cheaper plan, then you need the more expensive option. If you want to listen to sports and that includes both NFL and any other one (MLB/NHL/NBA/etc), then you need the most expensive package.
When the two were competing (Serius and XM), the lineup differentiation made sense. Now that they're one company, it just looks like they're milking it for every dime they can get:
$9.99 = 80 channels that are essentially those in common between the two
$14.99 = 140 channels from the old lineup (either the Sirius lineup (howard stern, NFL, NASCAR) or the XM lineup (MLB/NBA/NHL)).
$18.99 = 150 channels with the combination of both of the special features.
$4.99 for ad free pandora seems about right. Granted, I think they should all be cheaper, but I rarely listen to anything.
And SiriusXM is a nasty company to deal with to boot. Tons of hidden fees, subscriptions are renewed in sneaky ways, and they treat their customers like crap. I bought a brand new car a year or so back. The Dealer "registered" the radio with SiriusXM, but this doesn't mean that the radio was active. It wasn't, and the radio wouldn't play anything from the satellite and demanded that I call SiriusXM. I was going on a 2 month business trip and decided to call Sirius when I got back to start the free 3-month trial. When I called them, they told me that they couldn't give me the full 3 months because my dealer "registered" the radio with them 3 months before. I fully expected them to cave if I escalated the issue high enough, but they refused to budge.
You dont understand the crime. The VICTIM determines, by thier natural reaction, what the crime is. If i BELIEVE that you are threatening me with a weapon, it doenst matter what it turns out to be. The fear it induced is the basis of the crime, not the actual item.
No. The test is usually what "a reasonable person" would have thought, not what "The VICTIM" thought. There are lots of unreasonable people in the world who are crazy and would be fearful if someone tried to shake their hand in greeting. This also defeats the problem of victims who thought one thing at the time of the incident then later changed how they thought of the incident. Rather than debate what Joe was thinking about (impossible to argue/debate) we can make arguments on what a "reasonable person" might have thought.
I have a feeling this is less about recovering from damages and more about teaching them a formal lesson (well, cashing-in under the guise of teaching them a formal lesson).
That's the entire point of a class action suit. To stop powerful companies from doing a large number of small harms and getting away with it.
I am a native Californian who was taught both that pedestrians have the right of way in crosswalks and that it would be shameful to walk out into one against the lights, including entering with the flashing don't walk sign that is equivalent to a yellow light for drivers. People who crossed randomly in mid-block would be ticketed for jay-walking if observed by a cop, and found at fault if they were run down by a car. As a bicyclist I was taught that I should ride in the roadway and follow vehicle rules including direction of travel, signaling turns, and observing traffic control signals and right-of-way rules.
Continuing to live in California now in my forties, I observe so much behavior that is counter to what I was taught and obeyed. I don't know if it is all immigration with newcomers having learned different rules. Or, it might just be a general erosion of a sense of civic responsibility. Or I might just be turning into a cranky old man who complains about kids these days.
I frequently bicycle to work using a circuitous route that links scenic paths and bike lanes to minimize my time sharing lanes with cars. I have seen more close calls in the past few years than I saw in my entire life before, with cars clearly running red lights, overtaking and swerving across bike lanes with no concern for cyclists occupying the lane, etc. I have also seen so many cyclists and pedestrians doing equivalently careless things like crossing against lights, ignoring direction of travel rules, and mindlessly entering and leaving the roadway without looking.
Police used to issue tickets for these things. But sitting in a speed trap maximizes more revenue. I have never heard of anyone in my lifetime (30 years) getting a ticket for actual unsafe driving, despite seeing it every day. Everyone I know has gotten a speeding ticket however.
American sanctions and persecution keep the religious hardliners in power in Iran. Just like they kept the Communists in power in Cuba. We turned China into a capitalist "Western" country (just like us) using trade and open borders, there is no reason it won't work in Iran.
Same as North Korea. And the US to some extent. You need a big bad enemy to keep people distracted from the real problems.
First you deregulate trade, and you use that to pressure your suppliers to have the lowest possible cost. In order to achieve this, the suppliers must crush workers in remote countries and fuck the environment... and suddently you discover that there is only one single ecosystem and that pollution affects you.
It is nice to see a US government that acknowledges there is general interest linked to environment. What will come next? They should push international environmental regulations that trump trade deregulation. I wonder if I will live long enough to see that.
Maybe the nations of the world should meet and discuss such a protocol. It will probably take a couple months to round up all those diplomats. I propose mid-April. The cherry blossoms should be blooming in Japan around that time. How about meeting in Kyoto? Beautiful city with plenty of high class hotel rooms.
I believe we should test this, in the real world. Get 30 to 100 people. Setup a course with fake cars and such. Have them all drive it without anything in their system. Then get them drunk and do it again. Then when they are sober, let them smoke pot, and do it again. Then once that is clear have them drink and smoke pot, and go yet again. Then for fun, do it with someone who is just smoking a cig while driving. Compare the results.
What we really need is better crowdsourcing funding of scientific studies. Big business bankrolls their own science all the time, often paying university professors to do their R&D for them. Marijuana enthusiasts need a mechanism to fund studies too. I would be happy to drop a lot of money on rigorous studies into marijuana effects. There is an incredible amount we don't know. Just as an example, I don't know of any study which tries to pin down the various effects of marijuana by comparing vaporization / ingestion (THC + CBD + ??) and combustion (THC + CBD + CO2 + CO + toulene + benzene + soot/tar + ???). Anecdotal evidence suggests that some of these nasty combustion products are responsible for "couch-lock". They might be responsible for other effects but we just don't know.
You mean like how they call it a narcotic, and a hallucinogen, when in fact it is neither?
If I smoke enough, sometimes I experience visual halucinations like this. It takes a lot of weed and it much more apparent with eyes closed. Sometimes I can see an object at the intersection point of the rays- usually somethingor someone I care about deeply, like my wife. This artists' self-portrait makes me think that I am not the only one to see such things. The "rays emanating outward from a central point with X in the middle" seems to be a common motif. It also appears in a lot of "psychadelic" posters and 1960's-era art.
Let's not fight marijuana falsehoods with other falsehoods. THC seems to cause visual hallucinations, or at least visual artifacts, in a non-zero amount of people. That doesn't mean that these effects are dangerous, but denying them means that you are basing your arguments in lies, just like anti-marijuana arguments.
Then how do you explain fucking Denver drivers and their 10 under in the echelon formation across the interstate when they're the only 4 cars within 2 miles?
No matter how hard you try, you cannot "get into the mind" of anyone*.
*ftfy. - I think it is what they call the qualia problem.
However it still might be useful in a similar sense as lenses that hamper your eyesight to resemble a cataract. It gives the researcher an idea how senses of such an individual are altering his/her perception of the world.
"... being developed by 17 different contractor teams..."
There's a recipe for failure if even I saw one!
Is that so bad for a search engine? If I had a bunch of people and needed to search a downtown neighborhood, I would break into teams and search different buildings all at the same time. Get the results of the search and organize according to relevence. Searching different networks is not much different. You could have a team of Tor specialists working on Tor, a team working on freenet, etc. Plus a team working on a common framework including a plugin or API system.
When it comes to diet and nutrition you may very well be better off with "voodoo" and "alchemy".
Have you tried to get an appointment with a witch doctor or an alchemist lately? The waiting list at the nearest shaman to my house is 8 months! I asked the receptionist why and she said there has been a mass exodus in the profession to dietary science. Less work and more money.
I don't get why these devices are on the Internet in the first place. If access is needed to read statistics, have an internal server scoop the info from the SCADA servers, hand it to a DMZ server, and the external applications use SSL with client authentication (both sides authenticate to each other using keys), to fetch the data, or if it has to be a person doing this, have a web server on the DMZ that is accessed via 2FA for this info. If the SCADA boxes have to be controlled through the Internet, then there is always a high security VPN that uses smart cards or USB crypto tokens.
One project I had a few years ago was to get data from manufacturing systems (systems which could be on the Internet, but at best, had security strapped on at the last moment... so they were not secure) to remote receivers. I ended up putting the systems on one isolated subnet with a Linux box that would scan them, then shove the data through a serial port with the Rx line cut (so it could only transmit, not receive.) The machine on the other end of the cable would take the data from the serial port and format it into useful reports, which wound up on a decently secure webserver.
No, this system wasn't fast, but it did the job where info could be read but a blackhat couldn't tamper with the isolated network without physical access.
We're talking gas stations here. Frequently these are small businesses with a single location, sometimes operating on a franchise model. Even if you think that the parent franchise should be pushing high security standards, there are a lot of independent 1-location operators out there. They aren't going to be set up the same as an industrial plant. Berating them for that is a bit silly.
This tunnel would be roughly the same length and complexity as the English Channel Tunnel. The combined metro area of London and Paris is 26 million people; Talinn and Helsinki combined are less than 1/10th the size. If you're thinking more in terms of connecting all of Finland to all of Europe the way the Chunnel connects the whole UK to Europe, the population of Finland is again less than 1/10th the size of the UK.
The Chunnel has been in or on the edge of bankruptcy for most of its existence.
I'm not sure this is gonna work.
It is a classic mistake to measure the benefit of infrastructure on the basis of "does it pay for itself in ticket sales?". The benefit to society may be much larger than the direct income generated.
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe it's me, but I thought light behaving as both a particle and a wave was a quantum state. And that quantum state exists until the system is observed and then it collapses into one of two possibilities. Looking that the picture in the link, and...I guess that's not what I was expecting. What am I missing here, physicists? Is the light particle/wave thing not a quantum thing? If it is, that picture doesn't seem like it describes both at once. It almost seems too...cartoony.
From my limited understanding, it appears the photo is showing the particle while showing the effects of the wave on the wire. If light particles were rocks, we are seeing a photo of the rock sinking to the bottom of a pond at the same time we are seeing the water being disturbed by waves. In other words, we aren't seeing the light as a wave, only the wavelike effects on another object.
Nothing wrong with a little tidal power but just looking at the geography it will never be a significant source of power.
Another problem is the cost. The prices listed in the summary are very expensive electricity ... and those are the lowball figures used to get the project approved, not the "real" numbers. Offshore wind would be cheaper, and have far less environmental impact.
As an traditional power plant engineer, offshore wind costs seem staggeringly high to me. A 90m (300ft) tall tower in the middle of the ocean supporting a nacelle that weighs about 520 metric tons (1.15 million pounds) doesn't come cheap. Have you seen rate sheets for the cranes that are needed to assemble these turbines? On land, they average in the tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars per day.
At sea, with the need for a large vessel and all the crew that a large vessel requires to keep it operating, the cost is staggering. I spent a couple weeks aboard the Tolteca, a Mexican heavy-lift ship with a 2000 ton crane and a crew of about 250. Even using labor from the developing world, the costs are astronomical. We invoiced them millions of dollars of work and they didn't even blink. An offshore supply boat rents out (in good oil-boom times, maybe not right now) for hundreds of thousands of dollars per day. A heavy crane ship is probably in the millions per day. That's just for erecting the wind turbine, which is probably at least a 24 hour lift. You also need specialized vessels to lay high voltage cable across the sea floor. Adding "marine" or "offshore" to the name of anything is an excellent way to multiply the cost by at least 3.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tidal_barrage suggests fish mortality is quite high with this method. Considering estuaries are typically fish breeding grounds, If the alternative wasn't nuclear I'd say it wasn't worth the risk to an already depleted ecosystem.
There are a very limited number of places on earth where tidal dam power works. Power output scales linearly with height difference. This map shows the tidal range all over the world. Combine that with a need for a bay or inlet that can be dammed without impacting commerce or the environment, and the list of places tidal power can be used shrinks dramatically. Remember, you need a bay or cove that is large enough to be worthwhile for making power, but not so large that it is economically important. And also not in an environmentally sensitive area.
Nothing wrong with a little tidal power but just looking at the geography it will never be a significant source of power.
It's already happened in America. Most manufacturing jobs have either become automated or outsourced. Most people work in the service industry. Same thing will happen in China.
I work at a facility with a large number of CNC machines making high tech stainless parts. Usually someone has to reverse engineer the old part. Someone has to draw parts in solidworks. Someone has to figure out what size the raw material has to be cut to, before it goes into the CNC. Someone has to load material into the CNC and know how to position it and run the machine. Someone has to order raw material. Someone has to be out trying to find customers. Someone has to make the raw materials at a vendor. Someone has to drive the trucks that deliver raw materials and take away finished goods. The actual cutting of metal might be automated but there are plenty of related jobs which are not.
Learn to play real guitar ..
Or any other instrument. I bought a $150 banjo, a $12 electronic tuner, and a $15 book (ISBN 978-1883206444) about 5 weeks ago. I've only had time to put in about 8 sessions of 30-60 minutes but that's all it took to start sounding somewhat good. I was concerned I would annoy my wife to death but the banjo sounds good even in the hands of a beginner.
Nearly one third of my 900+ games on Steam not enough for you?
Hell, the thing isn't even out yet and already it's prompted hundreds of developers to release their games on Linux too.
Video games are not a commodity like brown sugar. There may be slight differences between brown sugar manufacturers but 99% of people aren't going to notice. There may be "open world third person shooter with grappling hooks" games available for Linux, but I don't want to play "open world third person shooter with grappling hooks", I want to play Just Cause 2. If Just Cause 2 isn't in that 1/3 of games that Linux supports, then no, the progress on games for Linux isn't enough for me.
For me local game streaming effectively kills the notion of the SteamBox. Why have multiple powerful expensive PCs when you can have one and a $99 low power ARM box attached to your TV.
Have you actually tried to use the streaming regularly? For me, the input lag is significant enough to make it a nonstarter. There are a lot of little quirks too. I'm very happy they added the feature, but it isn't usuable for some games.
Use some sort of market rate. If there's a lot of supply, but not a lot of demand at a given moment, the price drops.
That's pretty much what we have now in many areas of the US (not all). It is called Locational Marginal Pricing, or LMP. You can see various realtime pricing maps by searching Google for "LMP map". Here's one of them.
The problem is that the people advocating for "net metering", AKA "I want to sell my power at full retail rates", don't want to pay to keep the grid maintained. The LMP price is wholesale. Getting that power to where it is needed requires transmission lines, and transmission lines need maintenance and have a basically fixed capacity. Therefore, there are real costs involved in transporting electricity from where it is generated, to where it is needed. "Net metering" is a fancy way of saying that you don't want to pay those costs.
Generation costs (wholesale cost) + Grid transmission fees = retail price
You are more than welcome to run an extension cable to your neighbor, but if people want to sell to the grid, they need to accept that the grid costs money to maintain, and demanding that utilities pay retail rates for wholesale electricity isn't going to happen.
Were your ideas relevant 10 years ago? Or did you perceive some problems which are only becoming relevant now?
Maybe he invented a "better way to do things", which was ignored for some time because changing would have required breaking the inertia of proven technologies. Then when companies today are trying to shave 0.2s from boot times, or improve performance by 3%, they see the value in doing things differently. I could easily see that happening.
That was a long time ago. Google has ignored that line the minute they became a publicly traded company. Every decision they make is how to benefit their stockholders.
Oh really? Because it sounds like they are basically shutting out the adult industry from their Blogger platform. If they wanted to maximize money, they would analyze adult content and serve up relevent ads, the same as any other industry. Budweiser certainly doesn't have a problem with selling alcohol to strip clubs. Johnson & Johnson doesn't take offense when adult stores stock K-Y Jelly. Google's business is analyzing data and serving up ads. Not leveraging a specific type of data to make money, for seemingly moral reasons, doesn't strike me as benefiting the stockholders.
If people weren't so set on getting Free Shit, this wouldn't be a problem.
But it seems a lot of people think they have a RIGHT to listen to music, created by others for the purpose of selling and providing an income, for FREE.
Look at all the bitching and moaning that happens on Slashdot about how shit should be free. Fuck You. Shit cost money to make and distribute and you fuckers should be paying for it.
Paid music is a relatively recent innovation. Back in the day, people made music for fun, without pay. Then we went through a period where the very wealthy financed music, either by paying musicians a salary to hang around with the King and play things on request, or by wealthy individuals commissioning music to be written.
The concept of the average Joe paying for music is only about as old as devices which could record and play back music. In addition, this time period almost completely overlaps with the time period in which we had free broadcast radio, where you could just pay a 1-time fee for some hardware and listen to the radio with no additional costs.
Hahahahahaha! $4.99/month for what is little better than radio, (which as far as I know is still free,)...
Satellite radio (SiriusXM) packages start at $9.99/month and go up to $18.99/month. If you want to listen to Howard Stern, or any sports, or their up to the minute traffic and weather, or get any of the 70 stations not included with the cheaper plan, then you need the more expensive option. If you want to listen to sports and that includes both NFL and any other one (MLB/NHL/NBA/etc), then you need the most expensive package.
When the two were competing (Serius and XM), the lineup differentiation made sense. Now that they're one company, it just looks like they're milking it for every dime they can get: $9.99 = 80 channels that are essentially those in common between the two $14.99 = 140 channels from the old lineup (either the Sirius lineup (howard stern, NFL, NASCAR) or the XM lineup (MLB/NBA/NHL)). $18.99 = 150 channels with the combination of both of the special features.
$4.99 for ad free pandora seems about right. Granted, I think they should all be cheaper, but I rarely listen to anything.
And SiriusXM is a nasty company to deal with to boot. Tons of hidden fees, subscriptions are renewed in sneaky ways, and they treat their customers like crap. I bought a brand new car a year or so back. The Dealer "registered" the radio with SiriusXM, but this doesn't mean that the radio was active. It wasn't, and the radio wouldn't play anything from the satellite and demanded that I call SiriusXM. I was going on a 2 month business trip and decided to call Sirius when I got back to start the free 3-month trial. When I called them, they told me that they couldn't give me the full 3 months because my dealer "registered" the radio with them 3 months before. I fully expected them to cave if I escalated the issue high enough, but they refused to budge.
You dont understand the crime. The VICTIM determines, by thier natural reaction, what the crime is. If i BELIEVE that you are threatening me with a weapon, it doenst matter what it turns out to be. The fear it induced is the basis of the crime, not the actual item.
No. The test is usually what "a reasonable person" would have thought, not what "The VICTIM" thought. There are lots of unreasonable people in the world who are crazy and would be fearful if someone tried to shake their hand in greeting. This also defeats the problem of victims who thought one thing at the time of the incident then later changed how they thought of the incident. Rather than debate what Joe was thinking about (impossible to argue/debate) we can make arguments on what a "reasonable person" might have thought.
I have a feeling this is less about recovering from damages and more about teaching them a formal lesson (well, cashing-in under the guise of teaching them a formal lesson).
That's the entire point of a class action suit. To stop powerful companies from doing a large number of small harms and getting away with it.
I am not the gpp you responded to...
I am a native Californian who was taught both that pedestrians have the right of way in crosswalks and that it would be shameful to walk out into one against the lights, including entering with the flashing don't walk sign that is equivalent to a yellow light for drivers. People who crossed randomly in mid-block would be ticketed for jay-walking if observed by a cop, and found at fault if they were run down by a car. As a bicyclist I was taught that I should ride in the roadway and follow vehicle rules including direction of travel, signaling turns, and observing traffic control signals and right-of-way rules.
Continuing to live in California now in my forties, I observe so much behavior that is counter to what I was taught and obeyed. I don't know if it is all immigration with newcomers having learned different rules. Or, it might just be a general erosion of a sense of civic responsibility. Or I might just be turning into a cranky old man who complains about kids these days.
I frequently bicycle to work using a circuitous route that links scenic paths and bike lanes to minimize my time sharing lanes with cars. I have seen more close calls in the past few years than I saw in my entire life before, with cars clearly running red lights, overtaking and swerving across bike lanes with no concern for cyclists occupying the lane, etc. I have also seen so many cyclists and pedestrians doing equivalently careless things like crossing against lights, ignoring direction of travel rules, and mindlessly entering and leaving the roadway without looking.
Police used to issue tickets for these things. But sitting in a speed trap maximizes more revenue. I have never heard of anyone in my lifetime (30 years) getting a ticket for actual unsafe driving, despite seeing it every day. Everyone I know has gotten a speeding ticket however.
American sanctions and persecution keep the religious hardliners in power in Iran. Just like they kept the Communists in power in Cuba. We turned China into a capitalist "Western" country (just like us) using trade and open borders, there is no reason it won't work in Iran.
Same as North Korea. And the US to some extent. You need a big bad enemy to keep people distracted from the real problems.
First you deregulate trade, and you use that to pressure your suppliers to have the lowest possible cost. In order to achieve this, the suppliers must crush workers in remote countries and fuck the environment... and suddently you discover that there is only one single ecosystem and that pollution affects you.
It is nice to see a US government that acknowledges there is general interest linked to environment. What will come next? They should push international environmental regulations that trump trade deregulation. I wonder if I will live long enough to see that.
Maybe the nations of the world should meet and discuss such a protocol. It will probably take a couple months to round up all those diplomats. I propose mid-April. The cherry blossoms should be blooming in Japan around that time. How about meeting in Kyoto? Beautiful city with plenty of high class hotel rooms.
I believe we should test this, in the real world. Get 30 to 100 people. Setup a course with fake cars and such. Have them all drive it without anything in their system. Then get them drunk and do it again. Then when they are sober, let them smoke pot, and do it again. Then once that is clear have them drink and smoke pot, and go yet again. Then for fun, do it with someone who is just smoking a cig while driving. Compare the results.
What we really need is better crowdsourcing funding of scientific studies. Big business bankrolls their own science all the time, often paying university professors to do their R&D for them. Marijuana enthusiasts need a mechanism to fund studies too. I would be happy to drop a lot of money on rigorous studies into marijuana effects. There is an incredible amount we don't know. Just as an example, I don't know of any study which tries to pin down the various effects of marijuana by comparing vaporization / ingestion (THC + CBD + ??) and combustion (THC + CBD + CO2 + CO + toulene + benzene + soot/tar + ???). Anecdotal evidence suggests that some of these nasty combustion products are responsible for "couch-lock". They might be responsible for other effects but we just don't know.
You mean like how they call it a narcotic, and a hallucinogen, when in fact it is neither?
If I smoke enough, sometimes I experience visual halucinations like this. It takes a lot of weed and it much more apparent with eyes closed. Sometimes I can see an object at the intersection point of the rays- usually somethingor someone I care about deeply, like my wife. This artists' self-portrait makes me think that I am not the only one to see such things. The "rays emanating outward from a central point with X in the middle" seems to be a common motif. It also appears in a lot of "psychadelic" posters and 1960's-era art.
Let's not fight marijuana falsehoods with other falsehoods. THC seems to cause visual hallucinations, or at least visual artifacts, in a non-zero amount of people. That doesn't mean that these effects are dangerous, but denying them means that you are basing your arguments in lies, just like anti-marijuana arguments.
Then how do you explain fucking Denver drivers and their 10 under in the echelon formation across the interstate when they're the only 4 cars within 2 miles?
To be fair, that is pretty safe driving.
No matter how hard you try, you cannot "get into the mind" of anyone*.
*ftfy. - I think it is what they call the qualia problem.
However it still might be useful in a similar sense as lenses that hamper your eyesight to resemble a cataract. It gives the researcher an idea how senses of such an individual are altering his/her perception of the world.
The illusion would be more complete if they piped the 'voices in your head' through a bone anchored hearing system. Then the voices would actually be in your head. Probably not a lot of people would sign up for the implant procedure just for that though.
"... being developed by 17 different contractor teams..." There's a recipe for failure if even I saw one!
Is that so bad for a search engine? If I had a bunch of people and needed to search a downtown neighborhood, I would break into teams and search different buildings all at the same time. Get the results of the search and organize according to relevence. Searching different networks is not much different. You could have a team of Tor specialists working on Tor, a team working on freenet, etc. Plus a team working on a common framework including a plugin or API system.
When it comes to diet and nutrition you may very well be better off with "voodoo" and "alchemy".
Have you tried to get an appointment with a witch doctor or an alchemist lately? The waiting list at the nearest shaman to my house is 8 months! I asked the receptionist why and she said there has been a mass exodus in the profession to dietary science. Less work and more money.
I don't get why these devices are on the Internet in the first place. If access is needed to read statistics, have an internal server scoop the info from the SCADA servers, hand it to a DMZ server, and the external applications use SSL with client authentication (both sides authenticate to each other using keys), to fetch the data, or if it has to be a person doing this, have a web server on the DMZ that is accessed via 2FA for this info. If the SCADA boxes have to be controlled through the Internet, then there is always a high security VPN that uses smart cards or USB crypto tokens.
One project I had a few years ago was to get data from manufacturing systems (systems which could be on the Internet, but at best, had security strapped on at the last moment... so they were not secure) to remote receivers. I ended up putting the systems on one isolated subnet with a Linux box that would scan them, then shove the data through a serial port with the Rx line cut (so it could only transmit, not receive.) The machine on the other end of the cable would take the data from the serial port and format it into useful reports, which wound up on a decently secure webserver.
No, this system wasn't fast, but it did the job where info could be read but a blackhat couldn't tamper with the isolated network without physical access.
We're talking gas stations here. Frequently these are small businesses with a single location, sometimes operating on a franchise model. Even if you think that the parent franchise should be pushing high security standards, there are a lot of independent 1-location operators out there. They aren't going to be set up the same as an industrial plant. Berating them for that is a bit silly.
This tunnel would be roughly the same length and complexity as the English Channel Tunnel. The combined metro area of London and Paris is 26 million people; Talinn and Helsinki combined are less than 1/10th the size. If you're thinking more in terms of connecting all of Finland to all of Europe the way the Chunnel connects the whole UK to Europe, the population of Finland is again less than 1/10th the size of the UK.
The Chunnel has been in or on the edge of bankruptcy for most of its existence.
I'm not sure this is gonna work.
It is a classic mistake to measure the benefit of infrastructure on the basis of "does it pay for itself in ticket sales?". The benefit to society may be much larger than the direct income generated.