Class troll moderation. I guess some Java idiot hates it when reality conflicts with this distortion bubble and was afraid others might learn the truth. The sad fact is, most everyone already knowns and understands the exact facts offered in my previous post - save only those idiots who believe as the original anonymous pro-java poster does.
As a side note, I use Java extensively. Its not like I live in a walled castle. I know what I'm talking about.
Little scared children and their Java delusions...and their troll moderators...
Actually, its not. Its extremely easy to read. Its only ambiguous if you don't understand proper syntax. This fact has been recently brought home by the courts. Its reading is extremely easy and frankly, can be done by most any any one. The only difficulty is the old english.
only that a lack of restriction doesn't appear to achieve anything.
Such a statement speaks loudly that you need to review history, but America's founding, the principals behind it, and modern history. The biggest slaughters have consistently happened when people buy into your logic. Basically your logic is a ringing endorsement for mass slaughter of the innocent. History time and time and time and time again proves your position is completely without merit. It may make your feel good, but that's only because you're ignoring the blood of innocents which accompanies it.
As for the pro-gun crowd, I don't know of anyone who wants to force a gun into your hand. Pro-gun has always been pro-choice. Whereas anti-gun always means, no-choice, and you are to suffer a fools fate - if such a fate is in the cards. And that completely ignores the entire primary purpose of the second amendment.
If you don't want guns. That's absolutely okay with everyone. The problems only stem from people who insist merit-less fears should condemn others to a defenseless fate; be it mugger or tyrant. Like it or not, but the second amendment is on record with the Germans and Japanese as being THE PRIMARY REASON the US mainland was never invaded. Like it or not, you likely owe a significant debt of thanks to the the US Constitution, specifically including the second amendment.
They were never intended for the purpose of dealing with smaller scale outbreaks of violence even ones as large as the Iraq war.
Actually they were. It was later decided that this class of weapon countered MAD politics and may actually encourage wide spread use of larger nuclear devices. In turn, these weapons provided limited tactical value, not to mention a long list of logistical and security issues. As such, such weapon programs ceased to be.
Not to mention, they guy that plays Superman had already announced it was his last season. He's tired of the show. Its hard to have a show when the main character leaves. To say the show ran its course is spot on.
The other Anonymous is absolutely correct. Get a grip. The continuous stream of completely bogus performance claims coming from the Java camp only serves to completely undermine Java.
Also claiming that C coders are just shit doesn't really help the cause.
I never made such a claim. You're trolling.
.. high performance computing applications written in Java have recently won benchmark competitions. In 2008 and 2009, Apache Hadoop, an open-source high performance computing project written in Java was able to sort a terabyte and petabyte of integers the fastest.
To wit:
I'll be that this is an I/O bound benchmark - by design. The hdfs (hadoops distributed filesystem) is an abstraction layered atop native (OS-embedded) filesystems. These native filesystems are implemented as optimized, native code. These native filesystems are always (originally) written/tuned in native C (and optimized by C compilers).
There may be significant performance overhead/latencies in the TCP/IP stack (processing) too. TCP/IP drivers are implemented as optimized, native code (even if off-loaded to a fancy TCP/IP Off-load engine - TOE). All of this is originally written/tuned in C as well.
So yes, this bencmark manages to use a dollup of Java code to spread the heck out of some relatively simple 'record-sort' benchmark logic. A lot of the run-time observed is system time - not user time. The JVM hardly matters. In this benchmark, it just runs a dollup of logic that spreads around the sort work - to lots of commodity class servers (running Linux). On each server, that logic drives lots of native/C code - in parallel. By ganging thousands of such servers (versus mere hundreds of such servers in the previous record-setting attempt), this new bechmark effort manages to set a world speed record. Sure. So what?
This same result could have been achieved with Python... or Perl... or Ruby... or whatever. This is really just a demonstratation the power of distributed, parallel 'sorting' - irrespective of the implementation languages involved. It is hard to imagine that the modicum of top-level logic is anywhere close to being the rate limiting step. Therefore, this benchmark says little about the performance of Java - or any other scripting language that might have been employed to this same end.
This isn't about Java (performance). This is about the performance advantages of the distributed, map-reduce algorithm. It hardly matters whether this distributed, map-reduced sorting benchmark was implemented in JAVA, C/C++, Python, VB, Ruby, Perl or whatever! Lets not miss the whole point.
Cheers, Steffen.
So basically this has nothing to do with Java. The fact it was written in Java is barely worth mentioning. What was novel was the implementation, which could have been in any number of languages and in fact, the language choice would likely have zero or very, very little impact on the over all benchmark.
And that's the trouble with everyone constantly pushing Java is uber fast. Pragmatically its not. Period. It is, however, faster than many language alternatives. It can, however, come occasionally come close to C and/or C++ in some obscure corner cases. But without a doubt, if you have some Java code which runs 5x than C code, the C code is absolute crap and the differences likely stem more from implementation details or improper benchmarking.
Just because Java is not as fast as C/C++ does not mean its useless. If that were true, languages such as Lua, Python, Perl, Ruby, so on and so on, would simply not exist. For a large number of use cases, fast enough is certainly fast enough. Just the same, constantly making completely bogus claims about Java's pragmatic performance only serves to derail the language as a whole.
Well, the one thing we do know is that its extremely unlikely to be that.
Back then, all hearing aids that I'm aware of (I'm certainly no expert) were of a trumpet design; which were typically larger than your hand. Furthermore, you typically did not hold it up to your ear unless you were in conversation.
Given that she's simply strolling down the street, its just not probable its a hearing aid of some type.
To be clear, I'm not advocating its a cell phone, but I am advocating its unlikely to be a hearing aid.
Java is almost always slower and typically by a wide margin. When its not slower its typically some obscure corner case which rarely affects runtime performance, or where the C code is lacking in optimization. If you have some Java code which runs 5x faster than C code, it screams the C code was complete crap and nowhere near optimal. Its kind of like bragging how much smarter you are than the retarded kid down the street.
Let's not forget the JIT efforts for Unladen Swallow and PyPy are coming along nicely. And then there are projects like Snake Skin. Not to mention a plethora of other projects like pyrex and cython which support a python-like language for extensions. Python also has the advantage of being open, readily available, supports multiple programming paradigms, has a rich standard library, and is extremely easy to extend with a variety of technologies.
If you want static typing, do checkout Snake Skin.
This is already commonly done by law enforcement as well as PIs. When you are in public space, you have absolutely not expectation of privacy - so says the law. The law is entirely on their side and completely supports exactly what you are advocating.
laws as bugging private conversation
Notice the key word there. Technically, you can not have a private conversation in a public space.
Laws vary wildly from state to state. Just the same, generally, what I'm saying is accurate.
That's incorrect. Fire on any aircraft is extremely serious. Fire on an empty airplane isn't as bad because there is far less to burn. Fire with passengers frequently have an abundance of fuel sources. Furthermore, materials on aircraft are only required to be fire retardant. This does not mean they will not burn and/or spread fire to adjacent areas. Though being fire retardant does help slow the spread. These materials, with a heat source applied, will continue to burn. The really bad part is, fire on modern aircraft almost always releases significant toxic materials which are then inhaled.
The general rule of thumb, is a fire can not be extinguished in less than five minutes, it is extremely critical. Planes which are not on the ground in less than fifteen minutes after the outbreak of fire are typically catastrophic.
And in case you don't already know, when you fly you should go out of your way to wear natural fibers. Never wear artificial fibers. For women, wearing hose is especially bad. All too often, hose becomes permanently bonded to the flesh in even minor flash-overs, which would otherwise not necessarily be life threatening or even disfiguring. The result of wearing hose can be horribly disfiguring. Besides, most natural fibers have a natural resistance to burning, tend to burn less vigorously when they do burn, and frequently have less resistance to their removal than artificial fibers, such as poly-blends. Cotton is your friend.
To be an American and anti-gun is to be, literally, a walking oxymoron. But to specifically address your question, anyone who attempts to push an anti-gun agenda on Americans is a crazy person as well as Un-American. If you don't like guns, fine; I completely support your right. But to attempt to go crazy, subverting the very rights which allow you to have such an opinion, is crazy, anti-constitution, and flat out Un-American.
I feel the same way for anyone who believes they have the right to censor speech. When you can reasonable argue people should be arbitrarily censored, then I will support your right to be anti-gun. Either case represents a serious detriment to liberty and freedom.
Yes, it has. They forums typically lose when complaints are legitimate. Providing a non-legally binding disclosure provides no (or minimal) legal protection. If your users break the law, you absolutely can be held liable or even prosecuted. Its likely this signage deters the ignorant masses from actively seeking legal remedies for some perceived insult or abuse. So basically, its a form of social engineering rather than legal indemnification.
For example, in most states there are very specific signage rules which prevent people from legally carrying a firearm into an establishment. Many establishments place signs for anti-gun people to see, but it does not in any way actually deter (or legally prevent) concealed carry into the establishment. The result, crazy anti-gun people don't whine about allowing concealed carrying into the establishment despite the fact its happening right under their noses.
Are you sure the weather patterns you're seeing are being caused by the aliens inside your brain?
The article is wrong and misleading, which is hardly surprising given the source. They conflate several items and do an extremely poor job of separating fact from conspiracy theory. It is Wikipedia after all. Its what they are best known for.
The facts are, Tesla theorized it was possible to use Extremely Low Frequencies (ELF) to heat an area of the upper atmosphere, causing it to change shape (bulge into space). As a result, the lower levels of the atmosphere follow, filling in the void, resulting in atmospheric changes which can change global weather patterns by change in heating/cooling cycles and jet stream wind patterns.
The Russians were the first to get a machine online. Papers from the Air Force confirmed the US government accepted the Russians were manipulating weather/climate. As such, HARP was born. Later, additional released papers from the US Air Force absolutely confirms Tesla's theories. So in this part, we're talking facts, not crank theories as you ignorantly suggest.
The conspiracy theories come in when discussing if international weather warfare is currently underway, if Russia caused the worst drought in California history (which occurred after Russia brought their machine online and an unexplained, to this day, weather pattern developed which preventing inflow of moist air into California), is the US also causing droughts and earthquakes around the world, so on and so on.
The reality is, the HARP project, and others like it, according to the US government, the Russian Government, and Tesla, is absolutely capable or manipulating climate/weather. Anyone who says otherwise, is ignorant of reality and in denial of official internal government documentation on the subject. The conspiracy theory arrives that this "research" is actually being used to do exactly that to the detriment of others. To wit, I have absolutely no idea if that's the case, but would hardly be surprised to learn its true, given the US governments extremely long history of doing exactly this type of thing. In short, it would hardly be a reach in the least to learn there is some credence to the conspiracy theories, assuming you're not some crackpot, completely ignorant of history.
You should really make an effort to educate yourself on a subject before you start casting stones. At the end of the day, you're the only one that sounds like an idiot/crackpot.
Here is a good basis to start reading. For whatever reason, people forget there are numerous commercial PostgreSQL offerings. If you need to compete with Oracle on the high end, PostgreSQL absolutely has solutions, as do many other companies.
Anyone have any idea if any climate studies have been conducted which specifically excludes the weather/climate changes created by projects such as HARP? According to Tesla, this exact type of project could alter global weather/climate as well as create earth quakes where tectonic pressures are pre-existing.
Right now, the US has at least three (IIRC, two in Alaska and one in South America) of these stations operating around the world. Russia has at least one; which is one of the oldest units. There are at least sixteen others being operated by other countries around the world. Papers released by the US Air Force absolutely confirms that any one of these devices absolutely has the ability to indirectly modify global weather and climate.
As such, it would certainly be nice to know that climatologists are specifically excluding the human impact created by these devices in their studies. At such time, I seriously doubt any computer model includes these devices and their atmospheric impact in their simulations.
Bluetooth can't even work at those ranges. Just the same, there isn't a reason you can't do adaptive amplification based on signal strength and/or error rate. Which means, technically, they could ran at much lower power levels for much closer ranges. As such, it would be nice to see a graph comparing power, distance, and throughput for the two technologies.
Regardless, I suspect you're right - Bluetooth is likely still king.
I've read several articles on WiFi Direct but have yet to see a single one address power requirements, let alone power requirements compared to Bluetooth. Yet everyone seems to angle the two technologies as competitors.
Almost all of the areas where Bluetooth has wide penetration is exactly because of its power advantages and because its performance is fast enough. If battery like is reduced 50% but you can transfer 1000% faster, does anyone really care? I know I don't. After all, when I need faster transfers, I already have USB, WiFi, and likely a carrier connection. At which point means, the only "benefit" I'm really getting is a horrible loss of battery life and likely more expensive electronics.
Now it may be power is comparable to Bluetooth, but at this time I've not seen anything which even addresses power, which typically means, its a product not even worth consideration. They can get back to me when some details, which actually matter, surface.
That is actually quite different from what he is on record saying. Watch the video - Clinton comes across as being quite angry about these Republican claims that he failed to respond to terrorist attacks.
Where I had already said:
Basically Clinton's administrative policy was to ignore them as much as possible while as many people were murdered. Only after repeated attacks and complete lack of response by Clinton, did Clinton actually allow a pathetic retaliation which only embolden them to carry out the 9/11 attacks.
So to be angry about his lack of response after the fact, and after it had already piled on his plate is disingenuous at best. It doesn't matter what party you wish to associate, his response borders on inept and was shamefully inadequate. Anyone who feels differently, either wishes to blindly hold the party line or has yet to understand the actual time line and associated chain of events. To then further suggest only Republicans are shaking a finger at him is to completely ignore reality. The difference being, the Republicans simply capitalized on his ineptitude. That hardly invalidates his ineptitude.
I'm fully aware of the alternate explanations. Sadly, all that I've read have far, far, far more holes than the official explanation. Furthermore, the damage inflicted is typical of a modern torpedo design.
You need to keep in mind, some have even suggested it ran aground; which is even more absurd given the depths at which it sank.
Bluntly, until there is credible evidence to discount the official story, which is at least comparable in strength and credibility, there isn't anything else to consider. That's not to say the official story is the only possible explanation...its just the most likely based on readily available, credible information.
Remember, the entire point of the GPL is to use the system to subvert the system.
That's complete bullshit.
The entire point of the GPL is to focus revenue as services rather than sales of complex, copyrighted, IP. Yet that factual part is what always seems to get lost in discussions. From its inception, the intention is to allow developers to generate revenue from customizations, installation, maintenance, documentation, so on and so on, allowing developers of all sizes to participate in the market while preventing large corporations from strangling the market with monopolies on complex software.
Crackpots have come along and prevent its some socialist agenda where no one should be paid. The simple fact is, anyone who makes such a suggestion has completely missed the entire point of the GPL and has completely ignored its rather well documented history.
The actual leaders of Iran do indeed believe everything they say...but you'll also note that they are the ones saying that nuclear weapons are against Islam.
You need to review your statement. These are the same people building nuclear facilities.
Iran is the most absurdly overblown 'threat' to the middle east peace, ever.
History says otherwise. Iraq/Iran have always been central themes/threats to stability in the region. That's not to say there are not other players, but these two have been the heavy players. Now that Iraq is down and out, Iran becomes the single, significant player.
If an extremism group get a nuke and blow up Israel, it will be from Pakistan, handed off to some crazy Palestinian group. (And I mean 'crazy'. You can't blow up Israel without blowing up Palestine.)
The Clinton administration had plans which were promptly ignored by the new Bush administration.
Completely untrue! Blatant lie.
Clinton is on record as basically saying, I wash my hands of this as this is the next administration's problem. Clinton's administration basically said, "These guys are a problem. You need to keep an eye on them." Depending on who's account you accept next, basically the response was, "okay", to, "we are." They were commonly included in security briefings. The only gray area stems from the exact significance placed on them in the security briefings received by the next administration.
Basically Clinton's administrative policy was to ignore them as much as possible while as many people were murdered. Only after repeated attacks and complete lack of response by Clinton, did Clinton actually allow a pathetic retaliation which only embolden them to carry out the 9/11 attacks.
Basically you statement is a complete contradiction of all facts on record.
Slashdot Mirror
Class troll moderation. I guess some Java idiot hates it when reality conflicts with this distortion bubble and was afraid others might learn the truth. The sad fact is, most everyone already knowns and understands the exact facts offered in my previous post - save only those idiots who believe as the original anonymous pro-java poster does.
As a side note, I use Java extensively. Its not like I live in a walled castle. I know what I'm talking about.
Little scared children and their Java delusions...and their troll moderators...
The Second Amendment is ambiguous
Actually, its not. Its extremely easy to read. Its only ambiguous if you don't understand proper syntax. This fact has been recently brought home by the courts. Its reading is extremely easy and frankly, can be done by most any any one. The only difficulty is the old english.
only that a lack of restriction doesn't appear to achieve anything.
Such a statement speaks loudly that you need to review history, but America's founding, the principals behind it, and modern history. The biggest slaughters have consistently happened when people buy into your logic. Basically your logic is a ringing endorsement for mass slaughter of the innocent. History time and time and time and time again proves your position is completely without merit. It may make your feel good, but that's only because you're ignoring the blood of innocents which accompanies it.
As for the pro-gun crowd, I don't know of anyone who wants to force a gun into your hand. Pro-gun has always been pro-choice. Whereas anti-gun always means, no-choice, and you are to suffer a fools fate - if such a fate is in the cards. And that completely ignores the entire primary purpose of the second amendment.
If you don't want guns. That's absolutely okay with everyone. The problems only stem from people who insist merit-less fears should condemn others to a defenseless fate; be it mugger or tyrant. Like it or not, but the second amendment is on record with the Germans and Japanese as being THE PRIMARY REASON the US mainland was never invaded. Like it or not, you likely owe a significant debt of thanks to the the US Constitution, specifically including the second amendment.
They were never intended for the purpose of dealing with smaller scale outbreaks of violence even ones as large as the Iraq war.
Actually they were. It was later decided that this class of weapon countered MAD politics and may actually encourage wide spread use of larger nuclear devices. In turn, these weapons provided limited tactical value, not to mention a long list of logistical and security issues. As such, such weapon programs ceased to be.
Not to mention, they guy that plays Superman had already announced it was his last season. He's tired of the show. Its hard to have a show when the main character leaves. To say the show ran its course is spot on.
The other Anonymous is absolutely correct. Get a grip. The continuous stream of completely bogus performance claims coming from the Java camp only serves to completely undermine Java.
Also claiming that C coders are just shit doesn't really help the cause.
I never made such a claim. You're trolling.
.. high performance computing applications written in Java have recently won benchmark competitions. In 2008 and 2009, Apache Hadoop, an open-source high performance computing project written in Java was able to sort a terabyte and petabyte of integers the fastest.
To wit:
I'll be that this is an I/O bound benchmark - by design. The hdfs (hadoops distributed filesystem) is an abstraction layered atop native (OS-embedded) filesystems. These native filesystems are implemented as optimized, native code. These native filesystems are always (originally) written/tuned in native C (and optimized by C compilers).
There may be significant performance overhead/latencies in the TCP/IP stack (processing) too. TCP/IP drivers are implemented as optimized, native code (even if off-loaded to a fancy TCP/IP Off-load engine - TOE). All of this is originally written/tuned in C as well.
In addition, Hadoop's designers choose to employ native compression libraries - for 'performance reasons' (and due to non-availability of Java alternatives). See http://hadoop.apache.org/core/docs/current/native_libraries.html
So yes, this bencmark manages to use a dollup of Java code to spread the heck out of some relatively simple 'record-sort' benchmark logic. A lot of the run-time observed is system time - not user time. The JVM hardly matters. In this benchmark, it just runs a dollup of logic that spreads around the sort work - to lots of commodity class servers (running Linux). On each server, that logic drives lots of native/C code - in parallel. By ganging thousands of such servers (versus mere hundreds of such servers in the previous record-setting attempt), this new bechmark effort manages to set a world speed record. Sure. So what?
This same result could have been achieved with Python ... or Perl ... or Ruby ... or whatever. This is really just a demonstratation the power of distributed, parallel 'sorting' - irrespective of the implementation languages involved. It is hard to imagine that the modicum of top-level logic is anywhere close to being the rate limiting step. Therefore, this benchmark says little about the performance of Java - or any other scripting language that might have been employed to this same end.
This isn't about Java (performance). This is about the performance advantages of the distributed, map-reduce algorithm. It hardly matters whether this distributed, map-reduced sorting benchmark was implemented in JAVA, C/C++, Python, VB, Ruby, Perl or whatever! Lets not miss the whole point.
Cheers, Steffen.
So basically this has nothing to do with Java. The fact it was written in Java is barely worth mentioning. What was novel was the implementation, which could have been in any number of languages and in fact, the language choice would likely have zero or very, very little impact on the over all benchmark.
And that's the trouble with everyone constantly pushing Java is uber fast. Pragmatically its not. Period. It is, however, faster than many language alternatives. It can, however, come occasionally come close to C and/or C++ in some obscure corner cases. But without a doubt, if you have some Java code which runs 5x than C code, the C code is absolute crap and the differences likely stem more from implementation details or improper benchmarking.
Just because Java is not as fast as C/C++ does not mean its useless. If that were true, languages such as Lua, Python, Perl, Ruby, so on and so on, would simply not exist. For a large number of use cases, fast enough is certainly fast enough. Just the same, constantly making completely bogus claims about Java's pragmatic performance only serves to derail the language as a whole.
I had no idea they had electronic hearing aids back then.
+1 Informative! Please mod up.
it's almost certainly a contemporary hearing aid.
Well, the one thing we do know is that its extremely unlikely to be that.
Back then, all hearing aids that I'm aware of (I'm certainly no expert) were of a trumpet design; which were typically larger than your hand. Furthermore, you typically did not hold it up to your ear unless you were in conversation.
Given that she's simply strolling down the street, its just not probable its a hearing aid of some type.
To be clear, I'm not advocating its a cell phone, but I am advocating its unlikely to be a hearing aid.
Java is almost always slower and typically by a wide margin. When its not slower its typically some obscure corner case which rarely affects runtime performance, or where the C code is lacking in optimization. If you have some Java code which runs 5x faster than C code, it screams the C code was complete crap and nowhere near optimal. Its kind of like bragging how much smarter you are than the retarded kid down the street.
Let's not forget the JIT efforts for Unladen Swallow and PyPy are coming along nicely. And then there are projects like Snake Skin. Not to mention a plethora of other projects like pyrex and cython which support a python-like language for extensions. Python also has the advantage of being open, readily available, supports multiple programming paradigms, has a rich standard library, and is extremely easy to extend with a variety of technologies.
If you want static typing, do checkout Snake Skin.
They need to be forced at gunpoint to attend Jon Stewart's "Rally to Restore Sanity."
Priceless irony!
This is already commonly done by law enforcement as well as PIs. When you are in public space, you have absolutely not expectation of privacy - so says the law. The law is entirely on their side and completely supports exactly what you are advocating.
laws as bugging private conversation
Notice the key word there. Technically, you can not have a private conversation in a public space.
Laws vary wildly from state to state. Just the same, generally, what I'm saying is accurate.
That's incorrect. Fire on any aircraft is extremely serious. Fire on an empty airplane isn't as bad because there is far less to burn. Fire with passengers frequently have an abundance of fuel sources. Furthermore, materials on aircraft are only required to be fire retardant. This does not mean they will not burn and/or spread fire to adjacent areas. Though being fire retardant does help slow the spread. These materials, with a heat source applied, will continue to burn. The really bad part is, fire on modern aircraft almost always releases significant toxic materials which are then inhaled.
The general rule of thumb, is a fire can not be extinguished in less than five minutes, it is extremely critical. Planes which are not on the ground in less than fifteen minutes after the outbreak of fire are typically catastrophic.
And in case you don't already know, when you fly you should go out of your way to wear natural fibers. Never wear artificial fibers. For women, wearing hose is especially bad. All too often, hose becomes permanently bonded to the flesh in even minor flash-overs, which would otherwise not necessarily be life threatening or even disfiguring. The result of wearing hose can be horribly disfiguring. Besides, most natural fibers have a natural resistance to burning, tend to burn less vigorously when they do burn, and frequently have less resistance to their removal than artificial fibers, such as poly-blends. Cotton is your friend.
To be an American and anti-gun is to be, literally, a walking oxymoron. But to specifically address your question, anyone who attempts to push an anti-gun agenda on Americans is a crazy person as well as Un-American. If you don't like guns, fine; I completely support your right. But to attempt to go crazy, subverting the very rights which allow you to have such an opinion, is crazy, anti-constitution, and flat out Un-American.
I feel the same way for anyone who believes they have the right to censor speech. When you can reasonable argue people should be arbitrarily censored, then I will support your right to be anti-gun. Either case represents a serious detriment to liberty and freedom.
But has that ever actually been tested in court?
Yes, it has. They forums typically lose when complaints are legitimate. Providing a non-legally binding disclosure provides no (or minimal) legal protection. If your users break the law, you absolutely can be held liable or even prosecuted. Its likely this signage deters the ignorant masses from actively seeking legal remedies for some perceived insult or abuse. So basically, its a form of social engineering rather than legal indemnification.
For example, in most states there are very specific signage rules which prevent people from legally carrying a firearm into an establishment. Many establishments place signs for anti-gun people to see, but it does not in any way actually deter (or legally prevent) concealed carry into the establishment. The result, crazy anti-gun people don't whine about allowing concealed carrying into the establishment despite the fact its happening right under their noses.
Are you sure the weather patterns you're seeing are being caused by the aliens inside your brain?
The article is wrong and misleading, which is hardly surprising given the source. They conflate several items and do an extremely poor job of separating fact from conspiracy theory. It is Wikipedia after all. Its what they are best known for.
The facts are, Tesla theorized it was possible to use Extremely Low Frequencies (ELF) to heat an area of the upper atmosphere, causing it to change shape (bulge into space). As a result, the lower levels of the atmosphere follow, filling in the void, resulting in atmospheric changes which can change global weather patterns by change in heating/cooling cycles and jet stream wind patterns.
The Russians were the first to get a machine online. Papers from the Air Force confirmed the US government accepted the Russians were manipulating weather/climate. As such, HARP was born. Later, additional released papers from the US Air Force absolutely confirms Tesla's theories. So in this part, we're talking facts, not crank theories as you ignorantly suggest.
The conspiracy theories come in when discussing if international weather warfare is currently underway, if Russia caused the worst drought in California history (which occurred after Russia brought their machine online and an unexplained, to this day, weather pattern developed which preventing inflow of moist air into California), is the US also causing droughts and earthquakes around the world, so on and so on.
The reality is, the HARP project, and others like it, according to the US government, the Russian Government, and Tesla, is absolutely capable or manipulating climate/weather. Anyone who says otherwise, is ignorant of reality and in denial of official internal government documentation on the subject. The conspiracy theory arrives that this "research" is actually being used to do exactly that to the detriment of others. To wit, I have absolutely no idea if that's the case, but would hardly be surprised to learn its true, given the US governments extremely long history of doing exactly this type of thing. In short, it would hardly be a reach in the least to learn there is some credence to the conspiracy theories, assuming you're not some crackpot, completely ignorant of history.
You should really make an effort to educate yourself on a subject before you start casting stones. At the end of the day, you're the only one that sounds like an idiot/crackpot.
Here is a good basis to start reading. For whatever reason, people forget there are numerous commercial PostgreSQL offerings. If you need to compete with Oracle on the high end, PostgreSQL absolutely has solutions, as do many other companies.
Anyone have any idea if any climate studies have been conducted which specifically excludes the weather/climate changes created by projects such as HARP? According to Tesla, this exact type of project could alter global weather/climate as well as create earth quakes where tectonic pressures are pre-existing.
Right now, the US has at least three (IIRC, two in Alaska and one in South America) of these stations operating around the world. Russia has at least one; which is one of the oldest units. There are at least sixteen others being operated by other countries around the world. Papers released by the US Air Force absolutely confirms that any one of these devices absolutely has the ability to indirectly modify global weather and climate.
As such, it would certainly be nice to know that climatologists are specifically excluding the human impact created by these devices in their studies. At such time, I seriously doubt any computer model includes these devices and their atmospheric impact in their simulations.
Can we stop using religious terms for technological things that are based in facts?
(n) bible (a book regarded as authoritative in its field)
Can we start learning the basic definition of words before we start ignorantly criticizing others for actually knowing what they are talking about?
This would mean to get the 200 yd range
Bluetooth can't even work at those ranges. Just the same, there isn't a reason you can't do adaptive amplification based on signal strength and/or error rate. Which means, technically, they could ran at much lower power levels for much closer ranges. As such, it would be nice to see a graph comparing power, distance, and throughput for the two technologies.
Regardless, I suspect you're right - Bluetooth is likely still king.
Exactly.
I've read several articles on WiFi Direct but have yet to see a single one address power requirements, let alone power requirements compared to Bluetooth. Yet everyone seems to angle the two technologies as competitors.
Almost all of the areas where Bluetooth has wide penetration is exactly because of its power advantages and because its performance is fast enough. If battery like is reduced 50% but you can transfer 1000% faster, does anyone really care? I know I don't. After all, when I need faster transfers, I already have USB, WiFi, and likely a carrier connection. At which point means, the only "benefit" I'm really getting is a horrible loss of battery life and likely more expensive electronics.
Now it may be power is comparable to Bluetooth, but at this time I've not seen anything which even addresses power, which typically means, its a product not even worth consideration. They can get back to me when some details, which actually matter, surface.
That is actually quite different from what he is on record saying. Watch the video - Clinton comes across as being quite angry about these Republican claims that he failed to respond to terrorist attacks.
Where I had already said:
Basically Clinton's administrative policy was to ignore them as much as possible while as many people were murdered. Only after repeated attacks and complete lack of response by Clinton, did Clinton actually allow a pathetic retaliation which only embolden them to carry out the 9/11 attacks.
So to be angry about his lack of response after the fact, and after it had already piled on his plate is disingenuous at best. It doesn't matter what party you wish to associate, his response borders on inept and was shamefully inadequate. Anyone who feels differently, either wishes to blindly hold the party line or has yet to understand the actual time line and associated chain of events. To then further suggest only Republicans are shaking a finger at him is to completely ignore reality. The difference being, the Republicans simply capitalized on his ineptitude. That hardly invalidates his ineptitude.
I'm fully aware of the alternate explanations. Sadly, all that I've read have far, far, far more holes than the official explanation. Furthermore, the damage inflicted is typical of a modern torpedo design.
You need to keep in mind, some have even suggested it ran aground; which is even more absurd given the depths at which it sank.
Bluntly, until there is credible evidence to discount the official story, which is at least comparable in strength and credibility, there isn't anything else to consider. That's not to say the official story is the only possible explanation...its just the most likely based on readily available, credible information.
Remember, the entire point of the GPL is to use the system to subvert the system.
That's complete bullshit.
The entire point of the GPL is to focus revenue as services rather than sales of complex, copyrighted, IP. Yet that factual part is what always seems to get lost in discussions. From its inception, the intention is to allow developers to generate revenue from customizations, installation, maintenance, documentation, so on and so on, allowing developers of all sizes to participate in the market while preventing large corporations from strangling the market with monopolies on complex software.
Crackpots have come along and prevent its some socialist agenda where no one should be paid. The simple fact is, anyone who makes such a suggestion has completely missed the entire point of the GPL and has completely ignored its rather well documented history.
The actual leaders of Iran do indeed believe everything they say...but you'll also note that they are the ones saying that nuclear weapons are against Islam.
You need to review your statement. These are the same people building nuclear facilities.
Iran is the most absurdly overblown 'threat' to the middle east peace, ever.
History says otherwise. Iraq/Iran have always been central themes/threats to stability in the region. That's not to say there are not other players, but these two have been the heavy players. Now that Iraq is down and out, Iran becomes the single, significant player.
If an extremism group get a nuke and blow up Israel, it will be from Pakistan, handed off to some crazy Palestinian group. (And I mean 'crazy'. You can't blow up Israel without blowing up Palestine.)
Not true in the least. Check your facts on nukes.
The Clinton administration had plans which were promptly ignored by the new Bush administration.
Completely untrue! Blatant lie.
Clinton is on record as basically saying, I wash my hands of this as this is the next administration's problem. Clinton's administration basically said, "These guys are a problem. You need to keep an eye on them." Depending on who's account you accept next, basically the response was, "okay", to, "we are." They were commonly included in security briefings. The only gray area stems from the exact significance placed on them in the security briefings received by the next administration.
Basically Clinton's administrative policy was to ignore them as much as possible while as many people were murdered. Only after repeated attacks and complete lack of response by Clinton, did Clinton actually allow a pathetic retaliation which only embolden them to carry out the 9/11 attacks.
Basically you statement is a complete contradiction of all facts on record.