At cool temperatures it is quite inert. It releases an Oxygen when heated to 300 degrees C, and when injected on the compression stroke, it lets you burn more fuel. It also provides a double-whammy of a cooling effect, and this cooling affect alone contributes significantly to horsepower and also helps compensate for the reduced life of the motor (measured in seconds, and tweaked in terms of *tenths* of seconds on some drag racing setups) due to the hot heads.
I'd attack this plan by pressing for a requirement that anyone who uses the weapon must be a fully trained and licenses anasthesiologist. I don't see how a legal argument could stand up against a segment of the medical profession essentially having its field deregulated.
"If I had a choice between an AM X2 3800+ with 1 gigabyte of ram and X2 5000 with only 512 I would go for the extra ram everytime."
In one of our applications, RAM (size and speed) makes a much bigger difference than CPU power. I've seen people put together what they thought were high end systems, only to skimp on RAM, because they've got it in their heads that memory isn't of major importance.
We pay attention to memory timings, and we test them.
"Are you aware that there are people who even get new SSNs and change names, marry new women, and have even joined different military services while having deserted from another force?"
So if Hans is executed for murder (and I don't know if they do that in CA), and someone in the future ID's Nina, can *Nina* be charged with *Hans'* murder?
>So by your standards a tramp drunk on meths at eleven in the morning would be a career success.
If he believes he is, then sure. Why not? The burden on society thing? The "drugs are illegal and this makes him an outlaw" thing? If that's how far to the extreme you have to go to shoot me down, I think you just told me I'm right:-)
>Wow, a Monopoly snob. I didn't know they existed.
Fair enough; but I just get tired of responding to people who believe a game of Monopoly is necessarily long and boring, even when their alterations to the rules are what caused the problem.
I don't want to overclock for performance, I want to *underclock* for cooling (for sound reduction.)
I never seem to find any information about what CPUs and motherboards allow you to purposely drop the performance, or how that would affect cooling. Even in silent PC circles, I find mainly people trying to maximize performance and then compensate for the cooling issues and associated noise. Suggestions?
Monopoly doesn't have to be a boring game. It can be rather fast-paced and brutal, provided you play according to the actual rules of the game. Trouble is, few people seem willing to play by those rules, and that's a shame. The game can take on significant role-playing aspects that add a wonderful dimension. I prefer to play the Banker as a disinterested referee. It's fun because all money and property that passes between players, or passes between the player and the bank, goes through the Banker. And when you enforce the rules correctly, the economy of the game tends to be rational. One thing I definitely do not allow, is the notion that all tax money/fines etc. go in the middle of the board to be collected like a lottery upon "Free Parking." That silly house rule is pervasive, and is the single largest offending element that makes games interminably long. Another is when players are lax on the rules about building and tearing down, and when players are allowed to make ad-hoc private real estate deals that often violate the rules.
Play Monopoly according to the actual rules of the game, and if possible, have a Banker/Auctioneer/Referee who actually *knows* the rules and is willing to enforce and arbitrate, who preferably doesn't have a piece on the board. It's a completely different game when you do that, and with 4 players, often takes 45 minutes to an hour to play and usually tends to be a fairly well balanced economy right up to the end (not too many huge rapid reversals of fortune, unless someone gets really lucky and has the skill to exploit their luck.)
Common house rules and misinterpretations of the rules of the game lead to those six hour long boring struggles.
>Not one single president has ever been impeached.
More precisely, no impeachment has led to a conviction in the Senate.
>Nixon broke far fewer laws than Bush.
Do you know the specific laws that Nixon broke?
Can you make a legitimate case that Bush violated the law? Which exact laws did he break, when and how, and what evidence do you bring to the table? Do you think you could persuade a Congressional hearing to accept your argument?
Many people are of the opinion that a genuine legal case against Bush is easily made; they accept it as a foregone conclusion. But when it comes time to articulate the case, much of the evidence consists of speculation and prejudice, and the argument tends to be made from a position of ignorance of the law.
It's a good thing that Bush is the soon-to-be-former President and this administration is exiting. I'm no fan or supporter of the Bush-Cheney bunch. But at the same time, even as I accept that there might be a case to be made for impeachment, when you try to view the merits of such a case beyond the armchair analyist phase and start to consider how it would actually go, in terms of procedure and evidence.
Some good arguments have been made, and in particular, Ramsey Clark's Articles of Impeachment make a well-reasoned complaint. But if you had to be the one to take this a step further, what justification would you use for each of these articles and what evidence would you bring? There are strong defenses for some of these complaints, and others while shameful actions, are simply not crimes.
The belief that impeachment is a foregone conclusion actually tends to do harm to the legitimate business of opposition to the current Presidential Administration. Fortunately, it's just about over anyway.
>Tourism is already one of the biggest parts of the Cuban economy, and that's from people who fly thousands of miles >from Canada, Europe and beyond.
Not only that, the tourist trade includes people who could take their pick of European, Asian, African, North and South American destinations, or anywhere in the Caribbean, and yet many choose Cuba.
To be sure, many Cuban hotels are shitholes, but there are some resorts that are extremely nice, and some wilderness areas that are attractive enough for "ecotourists" that Cuba remains a travel destination for many who can afford to go anywhere they want.
The powers that be in the USA don't want you to see anything of Cuba except pictures of Castro and boat people and Havana ghettos and prisons. It is certainly not well-known that Cuba sports a growing number of genuinely upscale hotels and resorts. Americans seem to be under the impression that Cuba is off limits to *everybody*, that nobody is allowed to travel there under any circumstances, but that's just not true at all. 100 Euros gets a nice hotel room with a private beach, something you can't find in Jamaica or St. John... I realize there are a lot of sleazy hotels too, with non-potable water, etc. A friend of mine just came back from a bicycle tour in Cuba with some reports of really nasty experiences. (And no, he did not go to Cuba with the blessings of the Treasury Department.)
Anyway, there is a perception that Cuba has been deprived of everything that's ever been made since the 1950s just because the USA doesn't trade there.
Fascism is just the word that has been re-purposed to indicate any authoritarianism that the speaker disapproves of. The original meaning is lost already.
>From what I've read, he doesn't come off as very innocent.
>>I liked the good old days when you only had to be found not-guilty by a jury of your peers. I'll never understand >>this new-age crap where you have to be found "very innocent" by a jury of magazine editors.
Oh come on; nobody is old enough to remember a time when things like murderers weren't sensationalized and speculated on for sport or as theatre. There is certainly nothing "new" about it!
She can *never, ever* surface, and it's going to be really hard to live the lifestyle she's accustomed to, in hiding. She has to go undocumented, which is not that easy to do in Russia, or contrary to popular belief, in the States. By faking her death, she'd be giving up her ability to practice medicine, to say the very least. I suggest that Occam's Razor points to her being dead. I just hope the police find the body before some innocent person is traumatized.
>Uhh arresting and indicting someone doesn't imply we assume that person to be guilty. What do you think the trial is meant to check?
It does mean that the prosecuting agent assumes the person to be guilty. But they don't get to declare the person guilty -- they have to persuade an impartial court, which must maintain presumption of innocence.
Slashdot Mirror
>CPU and Memory are NEVER 100% full
You're thinking in terms of memory capacity; our bottleneck in this case is memory bandwidth and capacity is far less significant.
>Isn't it highly flammable?
At cool temperatures it is quite inert.
It releases an Oxygen when heated to 300 degrees C, and when injected on the compression stroke, it lets you burn more fuel. It also provides a double-whammy of a cooling effect, and this cooling affect alone contributes significantly to horsepower and also helps compensate for the reduced life of the motor (measured in seconds, and tweaked in terms of *tenths* of seconds on some drag racing setups) due to the hot heads.
I'd attack this plan by pressing for a requirement that anyone who uses the weapon must be a fully trained and licenses anasthesiologist. I don't see how a legal argument could stand up against a segment of the medical profession essentially having its field deregulated.
> The answer to that is simple.... Vista does not support the hardware of Dial up Modems!
There is a very short list of reasons I ever run Windows -- sending and receiving faxes is near the top of that list.
>Makes sense to me, nuclear winter and global warming will cancel each other out.
That's like saying you won't mind if I cut off your right arm, as long as I also whack your left leg, for balance.
"If I had a choice between an AM X2 3800+ with 1 gigabyte of ram and X2 5000 with only 512 I would go for the extra ram everytime."
In one of our applications, RAM (size and speed) makes a much bigger difference than CPU power.
I've seen people put together what they thought were high end systems, only to skimp on RAM, because they've got it in their heads that memory isn't of major importance.
We pay attention to memory timings, and we test them.
>Because gold has intrinsic value.
As a conductor?
Well, it might create two separate collectors' items: The limited newspaper edition, and the imported US release...
>Could I ask the name of the bank? I need to move my account.
My reading is that it will be the law in NZ that all banks must comply with.
"Are you aware that there are people who even get new SSNs and change names, marry new women, and have even joined different military services while having deserted from another force?"
So if Hans is executed for murder (and I don't know if they do that in CA), and someone in the future ID's Nina, can *Nina* be charged with *Hans'* murder?
>So by your standards a tramp drunk on meths at eleven in the morning would be a career success.
:-)
If he believes he is, then sure. Why not? The burden on society thing? The "drugs are illegal and this makes him an outlaw" thing? If that's how far to the extreme you have to go to shoot me down, I think you just told me I'm right
>Wow, a Monopoly snob. I didn't know they existed.
Fair enough; but I just get tired of responding to people who believe a game of Monopoly is necessarily long and boring, even when their alterations to the rules are what caused the problem.
I don't want to overclock for performance, I want to *underclock* for cooling (for sound reduction.)
I never seem to find any information about what CPUs and motherboards allow you to purposely drop the performance, or how that would affect cooling. Even in silent PC circles, I find mainly people trying to maximize performance and then compensate for the cooling issues and associated noise. Suggestions?
>Consider the same transaction when done between two D&D players.
If their meeting is plausible in-game, is in-character, is not against local in-game laws, etc., then fine.
Monopoly doesn't have to be a boring game. It can be rather fast-paced and brutal, provided you play according to the actual rules of the game. Trouble is, few people seem willing to play by those rules, and that's a shame. The game can take on significant role-playing aspects that add a wonderful dimension. I prefer to play the Banker as a disinterested referee. It's fun because all money and property that passes between players, or passes between the player and the bank, goes through the Banker. And when you enforce the rules correctly, the economy of the game tends to be rational. One thing I definitely do not allow, is the notion that all tax money/fines etc. go in the middle of the board to be collected like a lottery upon "Free Parking." That silly house rule is pervasive, and is the single largest offending element that makes games interminably long. Another is when players are lax on the rules about building and tearing down, and when players are allowed to make ad-hoc private real estate deals that often violate the rules.
Play Monopoly according to the actual rules of the game, and if possible, have a Banker/Auctioneer/Referee who actually *knows* the rules and is willing to enforce and arbitrate, who preferably doesn't have a piece on the board. It's a completely different game when you do that, and with 4 players, often takes 45 minutes to an hour to play and usually tends to be a fairly well balanced economy right up to the end (not too many huge rapid reversals of fortune, unless someone gets really lucky and has the skill to exploit their luck.)
Common house rules and misinterpretations of the rules of the game lead to those six hour long boring struggles.
I once believed that career success meant nobody could tell you how to dress or what time to be where.
I still believe that, but extend it to include, "nobody can require you to use Word, Exchange, or Notes."
>Not one single president has ever been impeached.
More precisely, no impeachment has led to a conviction in the Senate.
>Nixon broke far fewer laws than Bush.
Do you know the specific laws that Nixon broke?
Can you make a legitimate case that Bush violated the law? Which exact laws did he break, when and how, and what evidence do you bring to the table? Do you think you could persuade a Congressional hearing to accept your argument?
Many people are of the opinion that a genuine legal case against Bush is easily made; they accept it as a foregone conclusion. But when it comes time to articulate the case, much of the evidence consists of speculation and prejudice, and the argument tends to be made from a position of ignorance of the law.
It's a good thing that Bush is the soon-to-be-former President and this administration is exiting. I'm no fan or supporter of the Bush-Cheney bunch. But at the same time, even as I accept that there might be a case to be made for impeachment, when you try to view the merits of such a case beyond the armchair analyist phase and start to consider how it would actually go, in terms of procedure and evidence.
Some good arguments have been made, and in particular, Ramsey Clark's Articles of Impeachment make a well-reasoned complaint. But if you had to be the one to take this a step further, what justification would you use for each of these articles and what evidence would you bring? There are strong defenses for some of these complaints, and others while shameful actions, are simply not crimes.
The belief that impeachment is a foregone conclusion actually tends to do harm to the legitimate business of opposition to the current Presidential Administration. Fortunately, it's just about over anyway.
>Tourism is already one of the biggest parts of the Cuban economy, and that's from people who fly thousands of miles
>from Canada, Europe and beyond.
Not only that, the tourist trade includes people who could take their pick of European, Asian, African, North and South American destinations, or anywhere in the Caribbean, and yet many choose Cuba.
To be sure, many Cuban hotels are shitholes, but there are some resorts that are extremely nice, and some wilderness areas that are attractive enough for "ecotourists" that Cuba remains a travel destination for many who can afford to go anywhere they want.
The powers that be in the USA don't want you to see anything of Cuba except pictures of Castro and boat people and Havana ghettos and prisons. It is certainly not well-known that Cuba sports a growing number of genuinely upscale hotels and resorts. Americans seem to be under the impression that Cuba is off limits to *everybody*, that nobody is allowed to travel there under any circumstances, but that's just not true at all. 100 Euros gets a nice hotel room with a private beach, something you can't find in Jamaica or St. John... I realize there are a lot of sleazy hotels too, with non-potable water, etc. A friend of mine just came back from a bicycle tour in Cuba with some reports of really nasty experiences. (And no, he did not go to Cuba with the blessings of the Treasury Department.)
Anyway, there is a perception that Cuba has been deprived of everything that's ever been made since the 1950s just because the USA doesn't trade there.
Fascism is just the word that has been re-purposed to indicate any authoritarianism that the speaker disapproves of.
The original meaning is lost already.
>From what I've read, he doesn't come off as very innocent.
>>I liked the good old days when you only had to be found not-guilty by a jury of your peers. I'll never understand >>this new-age crap where you have to be found "very innocent" by a jury of magazine editors.
Oh come on; nobody is old enough to remember a time when things like murderers weren't sensationalized and speculated on for sport or as theatre. There is certainly nothing "new" about it!
She can *never, ever* surface, and it's going to be really hard to live the lifestyle she's accustomed to, in hiding. She has to go undocumented, which is not that easy to do in Russia, or contrary to popular belief, in the States. By faking her death, she'd be giving up her ability to practice medicine, to say the very least. I suggest that Occam's Razor points to her being dead. I just hope the police find the body before some innocent person is traumatized.
>Put yourself in his shoes - what would you do?
Don't touch *anything*. Call the *state police*, and an attorney that I already have a relationship with.
>Unlike his friend who might I add is an accomplished assassin.
I don't think I'm going to believe that until the judge admits it as a fact.
>Using your car analogy (/. loves those) it might be the case that some people run red lights because they're being tailgated.
I'd much rather be rear-ended than t-boned.
Where is the body? If you can't come up with a body, you at least need a strong theory as to how the body was disposed of or destroyed.
>Uhh arresting and indicting someone doesn't imply we assume that person to be guilty. What do you think the trial is meant to check?
It does mean that the prosecuting agent assumes the person to be guilty. But they don't get to declare the person guilty -- they have to persuade an impartial court, which must maintain presumption of innocence.