The only problem I see with all these IoT devices is that they insist on internet access. If it isn't online, it can't be remotely hacked. You don't need security updates if it isn't able to reach, or be reached by, the internet. Oh, you want to run it remotely yourself, say from work or while on vacation? Fine. ever hear of a VPN? I have lights, plugs, and various other devices that I firewalled off from anywhere but my local net. I can control any of them from anywhere I have internet access, just by first joining my personal, private, as secured as I can make it, VPN. Suddenly my phone or laptop are local, and I can reach my devices just fine. One attack surface, not dozens. Yes, "smart" speakers need access to work, fine, they can have it. But a hot tub? My lights? A simple plug? If it won't work without sending my usage and god knows what else back to the manufacturer, I won't buy it. BTW, TP-Link seems to be able to be local only without a problem. Very little else out there can make that claim, but I'd very much welcome more info on that, be it other brands that can be local only, or any caveat with the TP-Link brand.
The second claim is harder to prove for various values of creative. However, the Savanna-IQ Interaction Hypothesis was proposed to explain the statistically significant finding that in the general population people with higher IQs ARE more likely to identify as Bi or gay. Try looking it up before you spout your ignorance.
You make it sound as if this is the full explanation for how homosexuality occurs. It's far more complicated than that. For instance, with each subsequent son a woman gives birth to, the likelihood of that son being gay goes up. To the point that a 14th son has a 50% chance of being gay. That's postulated to be the mother's immune system learning to clear out androgens and the cells that produce them. Another confounding factor is that women who have 2 or more gay brothers have more offspring than women with only straight brothers. Which directly contradicts your postulate that a "pause in further offspring" is somehow the justification for homosexuality resulting from parental stress. Implied in your post is the thought that homosexuality is an undesirable condition that would go away if "things were perfect". You forget that the higher a person's IQ is, the more likely they are to be gay or bisexual. The more creative a person is, the more likely they are to be gay or bi also. Gee, maybe there is more value to gays than just "they don't reproduce" or even "they stick around & help raise their sister's kids" (another theory trying to explain gays in Darwinian terms without considering them to have any value beyond their sexual actions.) You are trying to use science to excuse your culturally induced prejudices.
Ha! Proof of time travel: Here I am on the east coast of the US at 6:56pm, and this story was posted at 7:40pm. Unless BeauHD is on a ship in the Atlantic, I call shenanigans! (Ireland isn't close enuf for only 5 posts since then...)
In all instances above I am referring to the electroweak interactions. The analogy you keep tripping over is simple: Given the example of electrons "reflecting" when interacting with an electromagnetic field, I postulate a similar mechanism may redirect a neutrino when it interacts with an electroweak force. Stop trying for the strawman and claiming I'm trying to say neutrinos interact electromagnetically.
I suspect Pence would be worse. If only the constitution and electoral college would allow a do-over, then we might stand a chance of correcting the damage in less than decades.
First of all, they are not regulating interstate commerce. They are only regulating how ISPs get to do business in california. The ISPs can do as they like in other states.
Second, and more importantly, the FCC has no power to regulate the internet - they specifically refuted that. So they have no standing to bring suit. Can't have it both ways, Agitator Pai.
I am replying mostly because of your strident tone when attempting to lecture me. Once again you missed what I said in your haste to refute. it. I never said the neutrinos would interact with magnetic lines, my second comment even specifically says so. Do try to keep up. As for deflection, how about a direct hit on a nucleus, or even perhaps a quark within a nucleus. Rebound can be a bitch.
I was implying that the electroweak force may have a similar mechanism to the electromagnetic force, not that neutrinos would interact electromagnetically. Once the energies are high enough, if they interact (weak force) at all, there may be a set of conditions that result in the neutrino "bouncing" back the way it came.
Since the electrons that make aurora bounce or reflect (particle or wave, you choose) as they ride down Earth's magnetic lines and go back up, perhaps the high energy neutrinos also bounce from a direct hit or "reflect" under the right conditions. One coming in from the side might undergo a glancing blow and be re-directed upwards. I'd kind of expect a bit of anomalous leakage when you are talking billions of particles.
Just because you are at the same distance from the planet as another piece of matter does not mean you are in the same orbit. Something more elliptical when you cross paths may be quite an encounter.
Or it could be in the same orbit, but going the other way. Wham!
Gee, a simple device (or app on my phone) just a little too close to my neighbor's house, and suddenly I am on his internal network? Hacking & other mischief will be so easy now! Thanx Amazon!
I have FirstinitialLastname@gmail, and wow do I get a lot of mis-addressed e-mails. Here's my canned response for those I do answer (I'm surprised nobody has posted this xkcd link yet.):
Sorry, wrong email address. Here's a relevant comic for you (this happens a lot): https://xkcd.com/1279/ Hold your mouse over the picture for more info
A bit long winded, but right on the money. I doubt the researchers could tell if the people in the study slept in 2 blocks - all the studies they examined were asking about total number of hours, but not if they were contiguous.
A rare event, but I'm asking: Please mod this AC up.
The human body does not emit terahertz waves in any detectable amount. And terahertz waves are NOT IR. That's like saying microwave ovens are FM radios.
I used a bluetooth to POTS gateway to plug in my old rotary phone from college. I could actually dial a number and somewhere upstream of the bluetooth connection it would be properly interpreted and get me the right connection. I don't think my cell phone was doing the conversion, but I have no proof. This was just 2 years ago
Slashdot Mirror
Also no erosion, which leads to very pointy, sharp edged regolith. Not too comfortable for roots.
The only problem I see with all these IoT devices is that they insist on internet access. If it isn't online, it can't be remotely hacked. You don't need security updates if it isn't able to reach, or be reached by, the internet. Oh, you want to run it remotely yourself, say from work or while on vacation? Fine. ever hear of a VPN? I have lights, plugs, and various other devices that I firewalled off from anywhere but my local net. I can control any of them from anywhere I have internet access, just by first joining my personal, private, as secured as I can make it, VPN. Suddenly my phone or laptop are local, and I can reach my devices just fine. One attack surface, not dozens. Yes, "smart" speakers need access to work, fine, they can have it. But a hot tub? My lights? A simple plug? If it won't work without sending my usage and god knows what else back to the manufacturer, I won't buy it.
BTW, TP-Link seems to be able to be local only without a problem. Very little else out there can make that claim, but I'd very much welcome more info on that, be it other brands that can be local only, or any caveat with the TP-Link brand.
The story link is to the right of the summary headline, up in the green space.
The second claim is harder to prove for various values of creative. However, the Savanna-IQ Interaction Hypothesis was proposed to explain the statistically significant finding that in the general population people with higher IQs ARE more likely to identify as Bi or gay.
Try looking it up before you spout your ignorance.
Nothing in blindseer's post implies any such thing. You just made-up a bunch of stuff, attributed it to him, then attacked it. You even put stuff in quotes, as if they were in the post! Probably someone else said those things to you, and you are transferring.
Last line of second paragraph. Now who's making something up?
You make it sound as if this is the full explanation for how homosexuality occurs. It's far more complicated than that. For instance, with each subsequent son a woman gives birth to, the likelihood of that son being gay goes up. To the point that a 14th son has a 50% chance of being gay. That's postulated to be the mother's immune system learning to clear out androgens and the cells that produce them.
Another confounding factor is that women who have 2 or more gay brothers have more offspring than women with only straight brothers. Which directly contradicts your postulate that a "pause in further offspring" is somehow the justification for homosexuality resulting from parental stress.
Implied in your post is the thought that homosexuality is an undesirable condition that would go away if "things were perfect". You forget that the higher a person's IQ is, the more likely they are to be gay or bisexual. The more creative a person is, the more likely they are to be gay or bi also. Gee, maybe there is more value to gays than just "they don't reproduce" or even "they stick around & help raise their sister's kids" (another theory trying to explain gays in Darwinian terms without considering them to have any value beyond their sexual actions.)
You are trying to use science to excuse your culturally induced prejudices.
Everything in moderation.
Especially moderation.
Ha! Proof of time travel: Here I am on the east coast of the US at 6:56pm, and this story was posted at 7:40pm. Unless BeauHD is on a ship in the Atlantic, I call shenanigans!
(Ireland isn't close enuf for only 5 posts since then...)
In all instances above I am referring to the electroweak interactions.
The analogy you keep tripping over is simple: Given the example of electrons "reflecting" when interacting with an electromagnetic field, I postulate a similar mechanism may redirect a neutrino when it interacts with an electroweak force. Stop trying for the strawman and claiming I'm trying to say neutrinos interact electromagnetically.
I suspect Pence would be worse. If only the constitution and electoral college would allow a do-over, then we might stand a chance of correcting the damage in less than decades.
First of all, they are not regulating interstate commerce. They are only regulating how ISPs get to do business in california. The ISPs can do as they like in other states.
Second, and more importantly, the FCC has no power to regulate the internet - they specifically refuted that. So they have no standing to bring suit. Can't have it both ways, Agitator Pai.
I am replying mostly because of your strident tone when attempting to lecture me. Once again you missed what I said in your haste to refute. it. I never said the neutrinos would interact with magnetic lines, my second comment even specifically says so. Do try to keep up. As for deflection, how about a direct hit on a nucleus, or even perhaps a quark within a nucleus. Rebound can be a bitch.
I was implying that the electroweak force may have a similar mechanism to the electromagnetic force, not that neutrinos would interact electromagnetically. Once the energies are high enough, if they interact (weak force) at all, there may be a set of conditions that result in the neutrino "bouncing" back the way it came.
Since the electrons that make aurora bounce or reflect (particle or wave, you choose) as they ride down Earth's magnetic lines and go back up, perhaps the high energy neutrinos also bounce from a direct hit or "reflect" under the right conditions. One coming in from the side might undergo a glancing blow and be re-directed upwards. I'd kind of expect a bit of anomalous leakage when you are talking billions of particles.
Just because you are at the same distance from the planet as another piece of matter does not mean you are in the same orbit. Something more elliptical when you cross paths may be quite an encounter.
Or it could be in the same orbit, but going the other way. Wham!
Gee, a simple device (or app on my phone) just a little too close to my neighbor's house, and suddenly I am on his internal network? Hacking & other mischief will be so easy now! Thanx Amazon!
I have FirstinitialLastname@gmail, and wow do I get a lot of mis-addressed e-mails. Here's my canned response for those I do answer (I'm surprised nobody has posted this xkcd link yet.):
Sorry, wrong email address.
Here's a relevant comic for you (this happens a lot):
https://xkcd.com/1279/
Hold your mouse over the picture for more info
A bit long winded, but right on the money. I doubt the researchers could tell if the people in the study slept in 2 blocks - all the studies they examined were asking about total number of hours, but not if they were contiguous.
A rare event, but I'm asking: Please mod this AC up.
The human body does not emit terahertz waves in any detectable amount. And terahertz waves are NOT IR. That's like saying microwave ovens are FM radios.
Terahertz waves are LOWER frequency waves than IR.
The cabin doorbell from Next Generation makes a great "new text" sound.
A few cometary impacts would change their numbers right quick. Equilibrium may be awhile, but still...
You've obviously never had real cow milk. Real milk is over 8% fat. The weak water you call "whole" milk is anything but. "Whole" is only 4%.
I used a bluetooth to POTS gateway to plug in my old rotary phone from college. I could actually dial a number and somewhere upstream of the bluetooth connection it would be properly interpreted and get me the right connection. I don't think my cell phone was doing the conversion, but I have no proof. This was just 2 years ago
Square, possibly cubical? I know it's unlikely, but if this thing looks artificial I sure hope they can stop the impactor from firing.