No, there is no 'easy' solution to security and people like you are why it's harder than it should be. Security is an ongoing process, not something you just install. The minute you forget about that little detail is the minute that you get pawned.
Medicine isn't far behind. People have been complaining about this for years. It is bad/misused stats. The null hypothesis needs to be predicted by your theory. When people use the opposite the logic is messed up, yet this method has been spreading like a disease from educational research, to psychology, to the social sciences, to medicine/biology, and most recently to the historically better sciences of physics and astronomy. I do not know about chemistry.
Medicine and economics have some interesting similarities. They both rely heavily on statistical models since direct experimentation is either impossible or just Frowned Upon. Their practitioners almost uniformly don't really understand statistics (does anyone?). There is a lot of money riding on the outcome and for some odd reason, people seem to think that medicine and economics are important.
The big mistake that economists made is not to offer a special advanced degree in the field. Instead of 'Medical Doctor' they should have had schools devoted to "Doctor Of Outmost Money" or something like that.
Except these conglomerates were formed by beach humans burning wood and trash and plastic and having the latter melt into the rock. Unless the fish (or other aquatic denizens) are starting fires somewhere, it's not likely to be a general mechanism.
Water is typically considered to be theuniversal solvent rather than the 'ultimate' solvent. But the chemical reactions might take millennia. It's more likely that degradation is due to a combination of bacteria and perhaps UV light or other reactive chemical processes.
Till the Republicans can put forth a candidate that isn't a looney toon the Democrats won't have any incentive to do a thing for this country.
A looney toon would be an improvement. As long as it's not Harper, there are a number of Canadian politicians that would do better than Bush Jr / McCain / Palin / Milt or the rest of the crazies in the Republican primaries. Really guys, if Romney was the absolute best you could do and if anyone is even thinking about Bush III, the democrats are going to win no matter who they stuff up there.
Oh you are quite wrong. The ACA (Obamacare) is not a giveaway to the pharmaceutical industry. That would be very low. It is, in fact, a giveaway to the insurance industry. And the lawyers.
The insurance industry and lawyers are like the laws of thermodynamics - you can't win any battles with them, you can't even battle to a draw, and you have to play with them.
Yes, RAW does. A Nikon D800 RAW file is 36 MB or so. I use 16 GB cards in my cameras and really have trouble filling them in a whole day shooting. If you're shooting between 2 and 5 16 GB cards for still images on a daily you might want to review that. You're shooting too often. Slow down and look. Even if you're only editing 10% of that you have 9 GB of files - that's roughly 250 edited images on a daily basis.
90 GB per shoot? Hopefully you're doing 4K video, otherwise you need to work on shot discipline a bit. With that many files you'll never get out of the basement. It's just not healthy at all.
Stack 5 shots of a raw file from a D800 and you'll get to 2 GB, not quite 90... Still not what I'd like to push across my typical sucks-to-be-me broadband Internet connection. '
Of course there are no 'hard facts' - nothing has happened yet and both Adobe and Apple are renown for not being especially forthcoming.
Yes, Hogan (along with half the planet) doesn't like Adobe. He's been pretty negative about the whole Creative Clown, er Cloud, thing. But his underlying premise is interesting - that this is the first step in Apple rationalizing a photography workflow. It's not 'the' photography workflow and may not fit many professional / prosumer goals - but that doesn't appear to be Apples audience. Perhaps. Hard to say since, again, Apple isn't terribly forthcoming.
But you have two big hitters in this space: Apple and Adobe. It will be interesting to see how this falls out. For my purposes, I've never liked Aperture / iPhoto. The workflow just doesn't fit with how I do things and isn't terribly flexible. I've actually enjoyed Creative Clown as I get to use After Effects and Illustrator for a perfectly reasonable price but YMMV, but I can't stand Lightroom. No matter, Adobe has recently started behaving better. You can now keep old versions running for as long as you like. You can download CS6 - forever. Yes, subscriptions are annoying but so is pretty much everything else these days.
It is expected that there will be areas of happy, mild weather in any scenario you care to imagine. It is to be expected that a bunch of locals in regions suffering from happy, mild weather might not be as concerned about the issue as someone who had their house wiped out by a tornado.
But it the concerns and insights of either set of persons would be irrelevant to the discussion of GLOBAL climate change (hint, the word that is BOLDED is important).
The American Medical Association? I should think not. If you did that, each drone would cost something north of 5 figures and could only be used by someone who went through a decades long training program while channeling hallucinations from some old dead Greek guy.
That said, I don't see how the FAA's rules are enforceable, nor do I see how the FAA can actually claim to have the authority to make rules in an an area that, as far as I can tell, congress has never granted them the power to do.
Enforceability is one thing but a few high profile cases will take the wind out of many peoples rotors. As to whether or not the FAA can regulate UAVs - it's pretty clear that they have broad powers of regulation when it comes to aircraft safety. UAVs that potentially serve as hazards to aircraft in flight or around a runway would easily fall under FAA jurisdiction. Kids flying something in their back yard - that's the big issue. If you look at the one 'hobby' that UAVs most closely resemble, model rocketry, you find a reasonable distinction between activities that are regulated by the FAA and ones that are not. It did take an act of Congress to carve this 'exception' out so the assumption is that, yes, the FAA could do this but the Congress doesn't want them to.
But here is the thing, alcohol is a carbohydrate and a good amount of the damage it does is really not all that different from fructose.
Incorrect. The physical damage from alcohol is due to two factors: direct toxic effect of the alcohol, mostly on various bits of the nervous system and aldehyde and ketone formation with subsequent liver damage. Alcohol does contribute to calorie intake but this is only a modestly important part of the disease.
You can keep you sugar bogey man bottled up for now.
Not to worry, we're going to see the downsides of freely available marijuana in the near term. Hint: concentrating the very potent strains available today (for example, brownies, hash oil or whatever the hell they're calling it these days) can induce a psychosis in some folks. Psychotic folks do dangerous / stupid things.
Is it anywhere near the extent of alcohol related harms? Nope. But don't pretend that ANY drug is harmless.
"Poison is in everything, and no thing is without poison. The dosage makes it either a poison or a remedy."
Not really. While you can go for a long time on sub replacement calories, you do need something. The vast majority of people will start going major league ketogenic, then hallucinate after about 48 hours. Try it sometime. If you're trying to 'survive' - and by that I mean you are in a dangerous situation that requires physical and mental effort to stay alive, starving isn't the best way to ensure survival.
That said, as soon as the TV and Twitter shut down, the majority of the US populace will be frozen in place, catatonic and confused. Easy pickings for the Zombies.
Slashdot Mirror
That's why there are TLD's just for that purpose.
OTOH, YouTube is proof positive that your latter statement is true.
No, there is no 'easy' solution to security and people like you are why it's harder than it should be. Security is an ongoing process, not something you just install. The minute you forget about that little detail is the minute that you get pawned.
That's the easy part.
"The International situation is desperate, as usual"
-- Tom Robbins
OMG. It's economists all the way down....
Medicine isn't far behind. People have been complaining about this for years. It is bad/misused stats. The null hypothesis needs to be predicted by your theory. When people use the opposite the logic is messed up, yet this method has been spreading like a disease from educational research, to psychology, to the social sciences, to medicine/biology, and most recently to the historically better sciences of physics and astronomy. I do not know about chemistry.
Medicine and economics have some interesting similarities. They both rely heavily on statistical models since direct experimentation is either impossible or just Frowned Upon. Their practitioners almost uniformly don't really understand statistics (does anyone?). There is a lot of money riding on the outcome and for some odd reason, people seem to think that medicine and economics are important.
The big mistake that economists made is not to offer a special advanced degree in the field. Instead of 'Medical Doctor' they should have had schools devoted to "Doctor Of Outmost Money" or something like that.
Huh. The only 'scientifically valid' law that relates to economic theory is Murphy's Law.
Except these conglomerates were formed by beach humans burning wood and trash and plastic and having the latter melt into the rock. Unless the fish (or other aquatic denizens) are starting fires somewhere, it's not likely to be a general mechanism.
Water is typically considered to be theuniversal solvent rather than the 'ultimate' solvent. But the chemical reactions might take millennia. It's more likely that degradation is due to a combination of bacteria and perhaps UV light or other reactive chemical processes.
Till the Republicans can put forth a candidate that isn't a looney toon the Democrats won't have any incentive to do a thing for this country.
A looney toon would be an improvement. As long as it's not Harper, there are a number of Canadian politicians that would do better than Bush Jr / McCain / Palin / Milt or the rest of the crazies in the Republican primaries. Really guys, if Romney was the absolute best you could do and if anyone is even thinking about Bush III, the democrats are going to win no matter who they stuff up there.
Oh you are quite wrong. The ACA (Obamacare) is not a giveaway to the pharmaceutical industry. That would be very low. It is, in fact, a giveaway to the insurance industry. And the lawyers.
The insurance industry and lawyers are like the laws of thermodynamics - you can't win any battles with them, you can't even battle to a draw, and you have to play with them.
Yes, RAW does. A Nikon D800 RAW file is 36 MB or so. I use 16 GB cards in my cameras and really have trouble filling them in a whole day shooting. If you're shooting between 2 and 5 16 GB cards for still images on a daily you might want to review that. You're shooting too often. Slow down and look. Even if you're only editing 10% of that you have 9 GB of files - that's roughly 250 edited images on a daily basis.
You'll never get out of the basement alive.
I think the tin foil is finally getting to you. You're supposed to swath your body in it, not eat it.
Ah, a typography Nazi.
Slashdot never fails to impress.
90 GB per shoot? Hopefully you're doing 4K video, otherwise you need to work on shot discipline a bit. With that many files you'll never get out of the basement. It's just not healthy at all.
Stack 5 shots of a raw file from a D800 and you'll get to 2 GB, not quite 90 ... Still not what I'd like to push across my typical sucks-to-be-me broadband Internet connection.
'
Of course there are no 'hard facts' - nothing has happened yet and both Adobe and Apple are renown for not being especially forthcoming.
Yes, Hogan (along with half the planet) doesn't like Adobe. He's been pretty negative about the whole Creative Clown, er Cloud, thing. But his underlying premise is interesting - that this is the first step in Apple rationalizing a photography workflow. It's not 'the' photography workflow and may not fit many professional / prosumer goals - but that doesn't appear to be Apples audience. Perhaps. Hard to say since, again, Apple isn't terribly forthcoming.
But you have two big hitters in this space: Apple and Adobe. It will be interesting to see how this falls out. For my purposes, I've never liked Aperture / iPhoto. The workflow just doesn't fit with how I do things and isn't terribly flexible. I've actually enjoyed Creative Clown as I get to use After Effects and Illustrator for a perfectly reasonable price but YMMV, but I can't stand Lightroom. No matter, Adobe has recently started behaving better. You can now keep old versions running for as long as you like. You can download CS6 - forever. Yes, subscriptions are annoying but so is pretty much everything else these days.
Repeat that after me, Mr. Fjord.
It is expected that there will be areas of happy, mild weather in any scenario you care to imagine. It is to be expected that a bunch of locals in regions suffering from happy, mild weather might not be as concerned about the issue as someone who had their house wiped out by a tornado.
But it the concerns and insights of either set of persons would be irrelevant to the discussion of GLOBAL climate change (hint, the word that is BOLDED is important).
Climate in not weather. Weather is not climate.
If you want a dead Greek guy, I suppose the AMA (Academy of Model Aeronautics) could channel Icarus.
The American Medical Association? I should think not. If you did that, each drone would cost something north of 5 figures and could only be used by someone who went through a decades long training program while channeling hallucinations from some old dead Greek guy.
Not a very good idea.
That said, I don't see how the FAA's rules are enforceable, nor do I see how the FAA can actually claim to have the authority to make rules in an an area that, as far as I can tell, congress has never granted them the power to do.
Enforceability is one thing but a few high profile cases will take the wind out of many peoples rotors. As to whether or not the FAA can regulate UAVs - it's pretty clear that they have broad powers of regulation when it comes to aircraft safety. UAVs that potentially serve as hazards to aircraft in flight or around a runway would easily fall under FAA jurisdiction. Kids flying something in their back yard - that's the big issue. If you look at the one 'hobby' that UAVs most closely resemble, model rocketry, you find a reasonable distinction between activities that are regulated by the FAA and ones that are not. It did take an act of Congress to carve this 'exception' out so the assumption is that, yes, the FAA could do this but the Congress doesn't want them to.
We may need to see something similar.
But here is the thing, alcohol is a carbohydrate and a good amount of the damage it does is really not all that different from fructose.
Incorrect. The physical damage from alcohol is due to two factors: direct toxic effect of the alcohol, mostly on various bits of the nervous system and aldehyde and ketone formation with subsequent liver damage. Alcohol does contribute to calorie intake but this is only a modestly important part of the disease.
You can keep you sugar bogey man bottled up for now.
'There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics'
Mark Twain (or Benjamin Disraeli or somebody else)
Not to worry, we're going to see the downsides of freely available marijuana in the near term. Hint: concentrating the very potent strains available today (for example, brownies, hash oil or whatever the hell they're calling it these days) can induce a psychosis in some folks. Psychotic folks do dangerous / stupid things.
Is it anywhere near the extent of alcohol related harms? Nope. But don't pretend that ANY drug is harmless.
"Poison is in everything, and no thing is without poison.
The dosage makes it either a poison or a remedy."
Paracelsus, 1700's I believe.
Not really. While you can go for a long time on sub replacement calories, you do need something. The vast majority of people will start going major league ketogenic, then hallucinate after about 48 hours. Try it sometime. If you're trying to 'survive' - and by that I mean you are in a dangerous situation that requires physical and mental effort to stay alive, starving isn't the best way to ensure survival.
That said, as soon as the TV and Twitter shut down, the majority of the US populace will be frozen in place, catatonic and confused. Easy pickings for the Zombies.