Grew up just north of MJ and went to school+SIAST there.
I fully remember the lousy snow clearing. My old Acclaim would routinely be scraping along, particularly on Mcdonald, because the ruts were so deep. It's remarkable I never lost any parts.
the IUPAC's definition is a temperature of 273.15 Kelvin (0 C) and a pressure of 100 kilopascals, though there's a bunch of other standards to choose from.
This subsequent case is also disturbing in its implications: In Canada, if a law violates one section of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, it's still upheld if it is justified under another section? That's ass-backwards to the way the U.S. Constitution works; that is, if a law violates any part of the Constitution, it's invalid no matter how justified it may have been under other sections.
The justified bit is specific to section 1.
"The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society."
The Oakes test is what determines if a limitation is "reasonable"
1. There must be a pressing and substantial objective 2. The means must be proportional
1. The means must be rationally connected to the objective
2. There must be minimal impairment of rights
3. There must be proportionality between the infringement and objective
I'm glad this case got settled "right", because any cheap 2-cent murder tale (meant in the fashion of the old days of pulp thrillers from 1920, not as an insult!) would have had this kind of thing, but because it's not *visual* it's suddenly against morals? Really?!
The law actually covers everything. "written matter, picture, model, phonograph record or other thing whatever".
And I believe the current obscenity law is fairly recent. IIRC, it was inserted in 1985 by Mulroney and his "progressive" conservatives to buy favor with the anti-pornography lunatic fringe of the feminist movement.
The Criminal Code's definition of obscenity is "any publication a dominant characteristic of which is the undue exploitation of sex, or of sex and any one or more of the following subjects, namely, crime, horror, cruelty and violence".
The prevailing standard for what constitutes "undue exploitation" is from R. v. Butler, which breaks potentially obscene material into 3 categories
1. Explicit sex with violence will almost always constitute the undue exploitation of sex. 2. Explicit sex without violence, but which subjects participants to treatment that is degrading or dehumanizing may be undue if the risk of harm is substantial. 3. Explicit sex without violence that is neither degrading nor dehumanizing is generally tolerated in our society and will not qualify as the undue exploitation of sex unless it employs children in its production.
Obscenity in Canada is "Any publication a dominant characteristic of which is the undue exploitation of sex, or of sex and any one or more of the following subjects, namely, crime, horror, cruelty and violence"
Wouldn't you just use a vacuum pump to pump out most of the air in the airlock back into the ship before exposing it to the atmosphere/vacuum of another planet?
Most, yes, but not all. You still lose a little air every cycle, which needs to be replaced.
Either your information is out of date or you're looking at atypically large spools. The 2lbs spools of ABS sold by Solidoodle for their printers are $43.
Given that reports are surfacing that the mother was in the process of having him committed to an institution, I think we can theorize that there was something else in play other than the autism.
Slashdot Mirror
The 2.5 gram 1982-1996 penny is 2.02 cents worth of copper at present price ($3.67/lb)
The 1997-2007 zinc penny is 0.46 cents of zinc ($0.92/lb)
No idea what the metal worth of the 2008-2012 steel penny is.
Grew up just north of MJ and went to school+SIAST there.
I fully remember the lousy snow clearing. My old Acclaim would routinely be scraping along, particularly on Mcdonald, because the ruts were so deep. It's remarkable I never lost any parts.
PA or MJ?
Also, a US gallon is 3.78 litres and the USD is slightly below par, so it's $4.15/gallon.
Pfft. Superhero heaven has no pearly gates, only revolving doors.
Across the board cuts will accomplish nothing more than cutting 8% of the fat, along with 8% of the muscle, bones, organs, and brains.
There is no "fuck."
Linus wrote "Fix your f*cking "compliance tool", because it is obviously broken.", asterisk and all.
The guy getting chewed out very likely gets paid considerably more than $0/hr. He works at Red Hat, as you can see by his email address.
is there some sort of standard I don't know about?
Yes. Standard temperature and pressure.
the IUPAC's definition is a temperature of 273.15 Kelvin (0 C) and a pressure of 100 kilopascals, though there's a bunch of other standards to choose from.
Xenon makes up about 87 parts per billion of the Earth's atmosphere.
The dry mass of the Earth's atmosphere is approximately 5.14 quadrillion tonnes.
That comes to about 447 million tonnes of Xenon.
Xenon is also a waste product from nuclear fission.
This subsequent case is also disturbing in its implications: In Canada, if a law violates one section of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, it's still upheld if it is justified under another section? That's ass-backwards to the way the U.S. Constitution works; that is, if a law violates any part of the Constitution, it's invalid no matter how justified it may have been under other sections.
The justified bit is specific to section 1.
"The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society."
The Oakes test is what determines if a limitation is "reasonable"
1. There must be a pressing and substantial objective
2. The means must be proportional
1. The means must be rationally connected to the objective
2. There must be minimal impairment of rights
3. There must be proportionality between the infringement and objective
I'm glad this case got settled "right", because any cheap 2-cent murder tale (meant in the fashion of the old days of pulp thrillers from 1920, not as an insult!) would have had this kind of thing, but because it's not *visual* it's suddenly against morals? Really?!
The law actually covers everything. "written matter, picture, model, phonograph record or other thing whatever".
And I believe the current obscenity law is fairly recent. IIRC, it was inserted in 1985 by Mulroney and his "progressive" conservatives to buy favor with the anti-pornography lunatic fringe of the feminist movement.
The Criminal Code's definition of obscenity is "any publication a dominant characteristic of which is the undue exploitation of sex, or of sex and any one or more of the following subjects, namely, crime, horror, cruelty and violence".
The prevailing standard for what constitutes "undue exploitation" is from R. v. Butler, which breaks potentially obscene material into 3 categories
1. Explicit sex with violence will almost always constitute the undue exploitation of sex.
2. Explicit sex without violence, but which subjects participants to treatment that is degrading or dehumanizing may be undue if the risk of harm is substantial.
3. Explicit sex without violence that is neither degrading nor dehumanizing is generally tolerated in our society and will not qualify as the undue exploitation of sex unless it employs children in its production.
Wrong country.
Obscenity in Canada is "Any publication a dominant characteristic of which is the undue exploitation of sex, or of sex and any one or more of the following subjects, namely, crime, horror, cruelty and violence"
See R. v. Butler for further details.
So the laws of physics prohibit differences in efficiency?
almost no dairy
That's not really a choice for them. Less than 10% of adult Chinese are lactose tolerant.
Where do "the laws of thermodynamics" state that efficiency doesn't matter?
Wouldn't you just use a vacuum pump to pump out most of the air in the airlock back into the ship before exposing it to the atmosphere/vacuum of another planet?
Most, yes, but not all. You still lose a little air every cycle, which needs to be replaced.
Sort of like losing your right to vote...
Which is another matter I find to be completely insane.
Whoever was convicted under such a charge likely had shit for a lawyer.
Or a deliberately overworked public defender.
Either your information is out of date or you're looking at atypically large spools. The 2lbs spools of ABS sold by Solidoodle for their printers are $43.
What? The Solidoodle uses a plain spool. It's the 3D Systems unit that uses a cartridge.
Significant amounts of chromium, magnesium, aluminum, and titanium, though barring a desperate shortage of said materials on Earth, it would be massively unprofitable to send it back.
Given that reports are surfacing that the mother was in the process of having him committed to an institution, I think we can theorize that there was something else in play other than the autism.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't that mean that the gravitational pull on surface dwellers would be four times that of Earth?
Only if it's the same radius as Earth. Surface gravity on a planet scales roughly with mass/(radius^2)
Wikileaks appears to be absent from those lists.