medical and other emergencies as substitutes for saline or filtered water.
That's because the lack of water is life threatening. And only clear urine is safe for consumption in such situations. If you urine is colored, it is not safe for consumption. Assuming you were properly hydrated before such a need arose (which statistically isn't likely; most Americans are mildly to moderately, chronically dehydrated), the rule is the first urination is the only safe urine to consume. After which, the containments become so concentrate you'll simply do organ damage and make it more difficult for your body to handle what water is has left. The concentration is typically denoted by colored urine and an oder is frequently associated.
You can go a long time without food, assuming you have body stores of fat and muscle. At most, you can go three days without water before you die. And chances are, after one day you'll feel like absolute crap. By day two, you'll be extremely lethargic, have difficulty thinking clearly, and have an extremely bad headache and very likely muscle aches. Vomiting is not uncommon. By day three, you'll likely only be able to lie on the ground, incapable of fine movement, incapable of clear thought, suffering, and eventually die.
So when weighing your options, the option is pretty easy. Suffering and death, or a small chance of infection or intestinal discomfort. Hmm...
I'm not sure where you got your information from, but it is woefully incorrect. I see others have pointed this out.
Feel free to visit your local airport and and quietly discuss bomb making with one of the security guards. I can assure you your life will be forever changed - and not in a good way. It is a federal crime to do so. Same for threats against the President.
As others have already pointed out, the majority of the people who make sure threats are mentally ill. Hardly surprising the person in question says he was drunk when he wrote the email. Diminished capacity to say the least, considering he couldn't even remember the contents of an email he wrote to the President of the US.
And as a side note, roughly twenty years ago I was at an airport discussing a computer virus. The word bomb was used to denote it would active at a specific date/time, as I was passing through security. The guard was polite and informed me that the word was not to be used in an airport unless I'd like my own private room. He then pointed me at a sign immediately behind him, clearly indicating it was a federal crime. Needless the say, the conversation stopped there.
I can assure you the information I provided is accurate. And even if you're not technically breaking the law, I can assure you the Secret Service will be more than happy to inflict some sort of legal discomfort in your life if you choose to ignore the provided information.
They don't truly believe in freedom of speech, and that's why they act how they act.
Freedom of speech has always stopped at the President. Always. Its illegal to make threats against the President. Its illegal to make hostile remarks to the President. His remark is somewhat hostile.
Something else to consider, Obama is the first black President in American' history. I imagine the Secret Service has been very busy with racists over and above what Presidents normally receive; which is considerable. From the Secret Service's perspective, do you really want to be the agent that receive an email from a would-be assassin, who killed America's first black president? I'm sure their moto is, check everyone they can.
Its also illegal to talk about bombs in airports or on a plane. Where's your damnation of airports and planes?
The problem is with the airport, not the country. He's an idiot!
Airport security must do their job at all airports they are mandated to operate. No exceptions. Obviously this is one of those airports. If he had really wanted to bring them home he should have either checked them or made sure his plane was at an airport which didn't have security.
Since the US has the same rules, hopefully he'll pull the same stunt here and never want to come back to the US.
For him to be pissed at a whole country for his own stupidity and huge ego speaks exceedingly poor for him. What a douche.
If it gets shot down at all, ignorance is prevailing. Been reading on several forums on lessor known games (Spring RTS, for example) and ATI drivers frequently cause problems. The situation I depicted RECENTLY happened and if you search the archives, various problems are constantly pop up. To imagine this is not a problem is to be delusional. Seriously.
Exactly as I said, if you don't care for OpenGL compatibility, ATI drivers will likely be a good experience for you. If OpenGL and/or alternate platforms are important, ATI is a choice of the ignorant and are fairly likely to experience problems; especially if you play games which are not part of ATI's test suite.
Bluntly, ATI has shit support for OpenGL. Anyone who says otherwise is either ignorant, pushing an agenda, or ignorantly pushing an agenda.
I would suggest checking out ATI, for the last year and a half or so nVidia has been playing catch up to ATI,
Unfortunately, for the last decade, ATI has been playing catch up to nVidia for quality of drivers. While their quality has improve considerably over the last several years, they are still many years behind that of nVidia; especially for OpenGL drivers.
And like it or not, for Linux, you still have exactly one high end 3D solution - nVidia.
I'd rather be a few frames slower with nVidia than slightly faster and unstable or unplayable with ATI. ATI just has a horrible track record even on Microsoft platforms. Just recently, they went through three drivers releases trying to fix simple OpenGL core features. ATI + OpenGL = horrible user experience. If you only ever use a Microsoft platform, chances are you'll happy with ATI; though even then there tends to be some exceptions. But if any non-Microsoft platforms are important to you, anything but an nVidia solution is a really, really, really bad idea.
Wow. In the US its the exact opposite. All recovered stolen property is returned to the rightful owner. Which really makes a lot more sense because there are many items which have far more intangible value than monetary value.
The Aussie law is pretty screwy because it potentially rewards theft and collusion. Now people can knowingly purchase stolen goods based on a simple legal assessment.
The reason he made the distinction is because they are using the FREQUENCY BETWEEN CHANNELS; for example, between 12 and 13. That frequency is not currently a channel. Its frequency between channels. Thus asking about channels is completely incorrect.
You need some help with math. A drop in the ocean times hundreds of millions of people times multiples per day is a lot of water. And that's exactly why so much energy is wasted. Energy prices would almost drop in half in the US if people with your math skills would pull their head from their tail.
The amount of energy wasted on transformers left plugging into a wall is simply staggering and is the exact opposite of "a drop in the ocean." Now add to this an extra 5-15% waste when items actually are charging and again, we have piled on yet more to the exact opposite of "a drop in the ocean."
Your logic is why we all pay A LOT more everywhere for everything.
Likewise with SVG fonts: implementation has to precede use.
That was entirely my point.
People are complaining that a rarely used feature, which has already been superseded, isn't implemented. Seems like, mountain and molehill, is an understatement to the extreme.
Not when other browsers go the full distance. Not when Firefox's own developers admit that it would be easy to add.
How many sites use custom fonts? How many of those sites are not tied to IE? How many sites require SVG font support? How many sites require a custom font and font don't use the WOFF? format?
I don't know the answers either, but I presume the number is effectively so small SVG font support simply doesn't matter, regardless of how easy or hard it is to support within the rendering engine.
It won't cost that much more, especially with 85% efficiency @ 15cm.
That's likely the transmission efficiency. Add to that the transformer's efficiency. Likely, a realistic, fully encompassing number is something like 70% efficiency, if that.
Why anyone would be excited about creating yet more power burden and demands, pointlessly, is beyond me.
A bladder infection isn't even required. Had sex recently? Urine is only sterile so long as its inside the bladder and the host does not have any type of infection which may contaminate it. Once the urine leaves the bladder, all bets are off. By the time urine exits the body its a big question mark as to how sterile the urine.
Ancient alien conspirators actually believe that the Holy Grail was actually a Manna Machine that produced this kind of algae
They also believe the Ark of the Covenant was a radioactive energy source of some type which powered the Manna Machine. Interestingly enough, the descriptions available do describe, if you want to liberally interpret the readings, a high energy weapon (gamma + laser beam or something) with radiation sickness; including for those who might open the Ark.
He may have been rated funny but it actually is, "clear". When a printing sells out, publishers print more. Anyone hearing about such a book which the government "doesn't want you to read", is going to so what with its second print? Sell more or sell less? Sell more obviously. A lots more, no doubt.
Its clear to anyone who can chain together the inevitable sequence of events which will follow such a buy out. Its about as clear as clear can be unless they will not only buy out all current printings but completely prevent all future printings. He used the word, "clear", accurately and concisely. What more do you want?
As a side note, Scientology used the same scam to generate interest in their church and its book, Dianetics.
It is basic economics: the price point is determined by supply and demand.
No its not. Oil lives entirely outside of basic supply and demand economics. I'll also pretend oil isn't a future; which is basically a way of saying we'll make up a price for tomorrow based on some absolute bullshit reason. That's not to say market forces are without any effect. After all, oil does ultimately feed into a supply/demand economy. Just the same, OPEC controls pricing entirely at their whim. In theory its based on supply and demand which is in turn driven by oil reserves and forecasts. In reality, OPEC fails miserably at controlling any of this.
Furthermore, if you've heard someone talk about the gas shortages of the 70's, its because OPEC decided to quadruple prices overnight as political retaliation. Such changes had absolutely nothing to do with actual oil shortages.
Oil and diamonds lives entirely outside of supply/demand economics. Artificial scarcity, monopolies, price fixing, collusion, market manipulation, futures speculation, and cartel controls are entirely different from fundamental, supply/demand economics.
You don't think the CIA actually believed that bullshit they put out, do you?
Once again we have people completely making stuff up here. Absolutely, the CIA believed what they put out. If they didn't, it wouldn't have been put out. Period.
What you completely fail to understand is how the CIA works. The CIA, extremely simplistically, is broken into two parts. One, field and two, analysis. The analysis part is what you're referring to here. The analysis part of the CIA is basically a think-tank. They are comprised on everything from profilers to subject matter experts. Their job is to gather, vet, summarize, and interpret both confirmed and unconfirmed intelligence. In doing so, they vet and document various elements from different intelligence sources, including in house sources, and create a subject brief. Each brief is then evaluated based on its confidence rating produced during the vetting process. The culmination of various briefs are then summarized into a portfolio. These portfolios are then made available for higher ups who then perform their own vetting process. Frequently these portfolios and briefs are disseminated internally within the CIA to aid in yet further brief creation, picking, choosing, and refining based on new intelligence and events.
In theory, unless specifically requested otherwise, only portfolios of sufficient quality (confidence) ever reach an actual intelligence briefing, let alone a briefing for the President. The failing here is the President made specific demands of the CIA to which the CIA director then lowered the threshold for what would ever be seen by the President, let alone an intelligence briefing. This in turn created a feedback loop for an ever lowering confidence threshold; whereby it appears the President, perhaps (likely, IMOHO) knowingly, used intelligence briefs of low confidence and set policy as if they were of high confidence.
So its not that they were knowingly fabricating intelligence. Its that what was denoted as having a low confidence was misused as if it was intelligence of a high confidence/quality. So if you want to blame someone, first blame the President, next blame the CIA director. The CIA itself simply did what they are suppose to do and continue to do to this day.
in order to create the perception of strength for both his country's civilians and his neighbours.
I've heard that said endlessly at this point and I still don't buy it all. It doesn't make sense at all. Never has. Not one bit. Had he not played his game, inspectors would have come, verified, left, and that would have been the end of it.
Unless you're position is that the only reason his neighbors hadn't invaded and the population hadn't revolted is they feared use of biological weapons by Saddam. I've never heard that suggested before. Is that your position?
The reality is, the people were completely terrified on Saddam. The number of people killed in the Iraq war is a drop in the bucked compared to the deaths inflicted by Saddam every year. He was a modern day Stalin. And that's not counting the roaming terror squads who would randomly pick someone up. Frequently they were murdered. Torture was always used - typically involving meat hooks. Mass rape occurred every day. The chance of civil revolt was zero. For it to be non-zero means the population would have revolted and overthrown the government at the start of of the invasion. The population was frozen in terror. There was zero chance of revolt. US had actually hoped it would happen during the days of the invasion. It never did.
This is specifically why they only wanted land owners to be able to vote. The rational is land owners are typically more educated, have a vested interested in their community, are better informed, and are far less susceptible to "mob rule" mentality or easy manipulation. The day that was abolished was the day the US immediately began a downward spiral.
These days the uneducated (typically poor) are commonly manipulated for their vote come election. Its so prevalent they are frequently considered tipping votes. This means the uneducated, who have no idea what they are doing, are frequently the tipping voice in our elections. This means the ignorant and uneducated and often responsible for setting policy in the US. Our forefathers would absolutely be disgusted. And if you think about it, you should be too. I know I am.
And even all that ignores the fact that WMDs were found. The were basically remnants of their previous stockpiles. Of course they were invaded because of supposed, massive levels of new production. It didn't matter that none was actually found as Saddam was more than happy to play the cat-n-mouse/shell game with inspectors which played right into intelligence reports. Reports, which seemingly, indirectly, verified Saddam has biological weapons to hide, much of which was on the basis of Saddam's cat-n-mouse/shell game.
The morale of the story? When your country is on the brink of invasion, don't play games which create the illusion you have what they are looking for, when people are looking to avoid the invasion in the first place.
But it does, yet once again, invalidate all of the climate simulations. This is what, the fourth or fifth time the simulations have been completely invalidated in just the last five or six years? My memory isn't exact on this but I promise I'm not far off.
Remember, climate simulations are constantly tweaked with current data. The simulation is then continuously tweaked until it matches history. The simulation is then run beyond known data to make predictions. This means the simulations didn't predict yesterday accurately. Most importantly, don't forget these simulations are by in large what are used to predict doom and gloom for the world of tomorrow.
Global warming likely is happening but it doesn't change the fact that "science" is using a baseline of temperature readings with errors higher than the values required to predict global warming and simulations which have not once, ever been close to simulating reality, let alone making accurate predictions.
Its extremely unpopular on slashdot to say these things but even a good chunk of climatologists (~20%) and almost all meteorologists (~70+%) will tell you the current state of simulations are all but useless and are only good for fear mongering and generating the next round of funding. As a scientific tool, they are all but useless. That's not to say they will never be of value - so continued research is a good idea.
Which means, at the end of the day, we are left with a lot of speculation and little more. Anyone who says otherwise is likely up for funding or ignorantly pushing the party line.
Slashdot Mirror
Interesting. Thanks for sharing the back story too.
medical and other emergencies as substitutes for saline or filtered water.
That's because the lack of water is life threatening. And only clear urine is safe for consumption in such situations. If you urine is colored, it is not safe for consumption. Assuming you were properly hydrated before such a need arose (which statistically isn't likely; most Americans are mildly to moderately, chronically dehydrated), the rule is the first urination is the only safe urine to consume. After which, the containments become so concentrate you'll simply do organ damage and make it more difficult for your body to handle what water is has left. The concentration is typically denoted by colored urine and an oder is frequently associated.
You can go a long time without food, assuming you have body stores of fat and muscle. At most, you can go three days without water before you die. And chances are, after one day you'll feel like absolute crap. By day two, you'll be extremely lethargic, have difficulty thinking clearly, and have an extremely bad headache and very likely muscle aches. Vomiting is not uncommon. By day three, you'll likely only be able to lie on the ground, incapable of fine movement, incapable of clear thought, suffering, and eventually die.
So when weighing your options, the option is pretty easy. Suffering and death, or a small chance of infection or intestinal discomfort. Hmm...
I'm not sure where you got your information from, but it is woefully incorrect. I see others have pointed this out.
Feel free to visit your local airport and and quietly discuss bomb making with one of the security guards. I can assure you your life will be forever changed - and not in a good way. It is a federal crime to do so. Same for threats against the President.
As others have already pointed out, the majority of the people who make sure threats are mentally ill. Hardly surprising the person in question says he was drunk when he wrote the email. Diminished capacity to say the least, considering he couldn't even remember the contents of an email he wrote to the President of the US.
And as a side note, roughly twenty years ago I was at an airport discussing a computer virus. The word bomb was used to denote it would active at a specific date/time, as I was passing through security. The guard was polite and informed me that the word was not to be used in an airport unless I'd like my own private room. He then pointed me at a sign immediately behind him, clearly indicating it was a federal crime. Needless the say, the conversation stopped there.
I can assure you the information I provided is accurate. And even if you're not technically breaking the law, I can assure you the Secret Service will be more than happy to inflict some sort of legal discomfort in your life if you choose to ignore the provided information.
They don't truly believe in freedom of speech, and that's why they act how they act.
Freedom of speech has always stopped at the President. Always. Its illegal to make threats against the President. Its illegal to make hostile remarks to the President. His remark is somewhat hostile.
Something else to consider, Obama is the first black President in American' history. I imagine the Secret Service has been very busy with racists over and above what Presidents normally receive; which is considerable. From the Secret Service's perspective, do you really want to be the agent that receive an email from a would-be assassin, who killed America's first black president? I'm sure their moto is, check everyone they can.
Its also illegal to talk about bombs in airports or on a plane. Where's your damnation of airports and planes?
The problem is with the airport, not the country. He's an idiot!
Airport security must do their job at all airports they are mandated to operate. No exceptions. Obviously this is one of those airports. If he had really wanted to bring them home he should have either checked them or made sure his plane was at an airport which didn't have security.
Since the US has the same rules, hopefully he'll pull the same stunt here and never want to come back to the US.
For him to be pissed at a whole country for his own stupidity and huge ego speaks exceedingly poor for him. What a douche.
gets shot down every single time
If it gets shot down at all, ignorance is prevailing. Been reading on several forums on lessor known games (Spring RTS, for example) and ATI drivers frequently cause problems. The situation I depicted RECENTLY happened and if you search the archives, various problems are constantly pop up. To imagine this is not a problem is to be delusional. Seriously.
Exactly as I said, if you don't care for OpenGL compatibility, ATI drivers will likely be a good experience for you. If OpenGL and/or alternate platforms are important, ATI is a choice of the ignorant and are fairly likely to experience problems; especially if you play games which are not part of ATI's test suite.
Bluntly, ATI has shit support for OpenGL. Anyone who says otherwise is either ignorant, pushing an agenda, or ignorantly pushing an agenda.
Intel's drivers are frequently a problem too.
I would suggest checking out ATI, for the last year and a half or so nVidia has been playing catch up to ATI,
Unfortunately, for the last decade, ATI has been playing catch up to nVidia for quality of drivers. While their quality has improve considerably over the last several years, they are still many years behind that of nVidia; especially for OpenGL drivers.
And like it or not, for Linux, you still have exactly one high end 3D solution - nVidia.
I'd rather be a few frames slower with nVidia than slightly faster and unstable or unplayable with ATI. ATI just has a horrible track record even on Microsoft platforms. Just recently, they went through three drivers releases trying to fix simple OpenGL core features. ATI + OpenGL = horrible user experience. If you only ever use a Microsoft platform, chances are you'll happy with ATI; though even then there tends to be some exceptions. But if any non-Microsoft platforms are important to you, anything but an nVidia solution is a really, really, really bad idea.
Wow. In the US its the exact opposite. All recovered stolen property is returned to the rightful owner. Which really makes a lot more sense because there are many items which have far more intangible value than monetary value.
The Aussie law is pretty screwy because it potentially rewards theft and collusion. Now people can knowingly purchase stolen goods based on a simple legal assessment.
The reason he made the distinction is because they are using the FREQUENCY BETWEEN CHANNELS; for example, between 12 and 13. That frequency is not currently a channel. Its frequency between channels. Thus asking about channels is completely incorrect.
It's really a drop in the ocean.
You need some help with math. A drop in the ocean times hundreds of millions of people times multiples per day is a lot of water. And that's exactly why so much energy is wasted. Energy prices would almost drop in half in the US if people with your math skills would pull their head from their tail.
The amount of energy wasted on transformers left plugging into a wall is simply staggering and is the exact opposite of "a drop in the ocean." Now add to this an extra 5-15% waste when items actually are charging and again, we have piled on yet more to the exact opposite of "a drop in the ocean."
Your logic is why we all pay A LOT more everywhere for everything.
Likewise with SVG fonts: implementation has to precede use.
That was entirely my point.
People are complaining that a rarely used feature, which has already been superseded, isn't implemented. Seems like, mountain and molehill, is an understatement to the extreme.
Not when other browsers go the full distance. Not when Firefox's own developers admit that it would be easy to add.
How many sites use custom fonts? How many of those sites are not tied to IE? How many sites require SVG font support? How many sites require a custom font and font don't use the WOFF? format?
I don't know the answers either, but I presume the number is effectively so small SVG font support simply doesn't matter, regardless of how easy or hard it is to support within the rendering engine.
It won't cost that much more, especially with 85% efficiency @ 15cm.
That's likely the transmission efficiency. Add to that the transformer's efficiency. Likely, a realistic, fully encompassing number is something like 70% efficiency, if that.
Why anyone would be excited about creating yet more power burden and demands, pointlessly, is beyond me.
A bladder infection isn't even required. Had sex recently? Urine is only sterile so long as its inside the bladder and the host does not have any type of infection which may contaminate it. Once the urine leaves the bladder, all bets are off. By the time urine exits the body its a big question mark as to how sterile the urine.
Ancient alien conspirators actually believe that the Holy Grail was actually a Manna Machine that produced this kind of algae
They also believe the Ark of the Covenant was a radioactive energy source of some type which powered the Manna Machine. Interestingly enough, the descriptions available do describe, if you want to liberally interpret the readings, a high energy weapon (gamma + laser beam or something) with radiation sickness; including for those who might open the Ark.
That's a plot. A conspiracy is when two or more people conspire together. And in some legalities, it actually requires three or more.
He may have been rated funny but it actually is, "clear". When a printing sells out, publishers print more. Anyone hearing about such a book which the government "doesn't want you to read", is going to so what with its second print? Sell more or sell less? Sell more obviously. A lots more, no doubt.
Its clear to anyone who can chain together the inevitable sequence of events which will follow such a buy out. Its about as clear as clear can be unless they will not only buy out all current printings but completely prevent all future printings. He used the word, "clear", accurately and concisely. What more do you want?
As a side note, Scientology used the same scam to generate interest in their church and its book, Dianetics.
It is basic economics: the price point is determined by supply and demand.
No its not. Oil lives entirely outside of basic supply and demand economics. I'll also pretend oil isn't a future; which is basically a way of saying we'll make up a price for tomorrow based on some absolute bullshit reason. That's not to say market forces are without any effect. After all, oil does ultimately feed into a supply/demand economy. Just the same, OPEC controls pricing entirely at their whim. In theory its based on supply and demand which is in turn driven by oil reserves and forecasts. In reality, OPEC fails miserably at controlling any of this.
Furthermore, if you've heard someone talk about the gas shortages of the 70's, its because OPEC decided to quadruple prices overnight as political retaliation. Such changes had absolutely nothing to do with actual oil shortages.
Oil and diamonds lives entirely outside of supply/demand economics. Artificial scarcity, monopolies, price fixing, collusion, market manipulation, futures speculation, and cartel controls are entirely different from fundamental, supply/demand economics.
+1 Insightful
+1 Informative
You don't think the CIA actually believed that bullshit they put out, do you?
Once again we have people completely making stuff up here. Absolutely, the CIA believed what they put out. If they didn't, it wouldn't have been put out. Period.
What you completely fail to understand is how the CIA works. The CIA, extremely simplistically, is broken into two parts. One, field and two, analysis. The analysis part is what you're referring to here. The analysis part of the CIA is basically a think-tank. They are comprised on everything from profilers to subject matter experts. Their job is to gather, vet, summarize, and interpret both confirmed and unconfirmed intelligence. In doing so, they vet and document various elements from different intelligence sources, including in house sources, and create a subject brief. Each brief is then evaluated based on its confidence rating produced during the vetting process. The culmination of various briefs are then summarized into a portfolio. These portfolios are then made available for higher ups who then perform their own vetting process. Frequently these portfolios and briefs are disseminated internally within the CIA to aid in yet further brief creation, picking, choosing, and refining based on new intelligence and events.
In theory, unless specifically requested otherwise, only portfolios of sufficient quality (confidence) ever reach an actual intelligence briefing, let alone a briefing for the President. The failing here is the President made specific demands of the CIA to which the CIA director then lowered the threshold for what would ever be seen by the President, let alone an intelligence briefing. This in turn created a feedback loop for an ever lowering confidence threshold; whereby it appears the President, perhaps (likely, IMOHO) knowingly, used intelligence briefs of low confidence and set policy as if they were of high confidence.
So its not that they were knowingly fabricating intelligence. Its that what was denoted as having a low confidence was misused as if it was intelligence of a high confidence/quality. So if you want to blame someone, first blame the President, next blame the CIA director. The CIA itself simply did what they are suppose to do and continue to do to this day.
in order to create the perception of strength for both his country's civilians and his neighbours.
I've heard that said endlessly at this point and I still don't buy it all. It doesn't make sense at all. Never has. Not one bit. Had he not played his game, inspectors would have come, verified, left, and that would have been the end of it.
Unless you're position is that the only reason his neighbors hadn't invaded and the population hadn't revolted is they feared use of biological weapons by Saddam. I've never heard that suggested before. Is that your position?
The reality is, the people were completely terrified on Saddam. The number of people killed in the Iraq war is a drop in the bucked compared to the deaths inflicted by Saddam every year. He was a modern day Stalin. And that's not counting the roaming terror squads who would randomly pick someone up. Frequently they were murdered. Torture was always used - typically involving meat hooks. Mass rape occurred every day. The chance of civil revolt was zero. For it to be non-zero means the population would have revolted and overthrown the government at the start of of the invasion. The population was frozen in terror. There was zero chance of revolt. US had actually hoped it would happen during the days of the invasion. It never did.
from being a "mob rule" type of government.
This is specifically why they only wanted land owners to be able to vote. The rational is land owners are typically more educated, have a vested interested in their community, are better informed, and are far less susceptible to "mob rule" mentality or easy manipulation. The day that was abolished was the day the US immediately began a downward spiral.
These days the uneducated (typically poor) are commonly manipulated for their vote come election. Its so prevalent they are frequently considered tipping votes. This means the uneducated, who have no idea what they are doing, are frequently the tipping voice in our elections. This means the ignorant and uneducated and often responsible for setting policy in the US. Our forefathers would absolutely be disgusted. And if you think about it, you should be too. I know I am.
And even all that ignores the fact that WMDs were found. The were basically remnants of their previous stockpiles. Of course they were invaded because of supposed, massive levels of new production. It didn't matter that none was actually found as Saddam was more than happy to play the cat-n-mouse/shell game with inspectors which played right into intelligence reports. Reports, which seemingly, indirectly, verified Saddam has biological weapons to hide, much of which was on the basis of Saddam's cat-n-mouse/shell game.
The morale of the story? When your country is on the brink of invasion, don't play games which create the illusion you have what they are looking for, when people are looking to avoid the invasion in the first place.
A smaller process? Unless there are inherent advantages (price, power usage)
A smaller process almost always means faster CPU or same speed CPU with lower power requirements and less waste heat.
But it does, yet once again, invalidate all of the climate simulations. This is what, the fourth or fifth time the simulations have been completely invalidated in just the last five or six years? My memory isn't exact on this but I promise I'm not far off.
Remember, climate simulations are constantly tweaked with current data. The simulation is then continuously tweaked until it matches history. The simulation is then run beyond known data to make predictions. This means the simulations didn't predict yesterday accurately. Most importantly, don't forget these simulations are by in large what are used to predict doom and gloom for the world of tomorrow.
Global warming likely is happening but it doesn't change the fact that "science" is using a baseline of temperature readings with errors higher than the values required to predict global warming and simulations which have not once, ever been close to simulating reality, let alone making accurate predictions.
Its extremely unpopular on slashdot to say these things but even a good chunk of climatologists (~20%) and almost all meteorologists (~70+%) will tell you the current state of simulations are all but useless and are only good for fear mongering and generating the next round of funding. As a scientific tool, they are all but useless. That's not to say they will never be of value - so continued research is a good idea.
Which means, at the end of the day, we are left with a lot of speculation and little more. Anyone who says otherwise is likely up for funding or ignorantly pushing the party line.