An iPod doesn't have a headphone plug. It has a headphone jack. So if the room also has a headphone jack, what do you plug into it? Headphones? And what is connected to it behind the wall? An iPod?
Somebody else pointed out that these short names arose from the use of teletypes, but did you also consider that when you type a command dozens, if not hundreds, of times in a session, "rm" is much easier than "remove" or "delete"?
I, for one, appreciate the shorthand, and I do touch-type.
Manipulated intelligence, you mean. This was reported by Knight-Ridder long before the Downing Street memo came to light; in fact it was reported even before the illegal invasion itself.
What's more unsettling is that somebody cared enough about Dokken to put up an article about them in the first place.
P.S. This is nitpicking, but that statement wouldn't come under the heading of slander, it would come under libel (assuming it meets the legal tests for that, which you and I don't have the factual information to determine).
I don't think you understood great-grandparent's definition of the EMH. Golgafrinchan wrote that EMH states that future *expectations* are reflected in the current price. So if the market *expects* RHAT's price to increase from yesterday's price by 10% over the next year, and the overall market *is expected* to grow 8% over the next year, then today's RHAT price today should be up 1% from yesterday's. That 1% increase happens independently of whether RHAT actually goes up 10% or drops 15% in the next year.
Stated this way it's almost a tautology. I say "almost" because there are too many chaotic factors that could inject noise into the system. People buy and sell stocks for other reasons than market expectations. Actual expectations (as an aggregate of market forces) are hard to quantify, so EMH remains a hypothesis.
There is a phenomenon called global dimming, which is basically about reduced sunlight on the surface of Earth due to particles in the atmosphere absorbing incoming sunlight.
If energy is absorbed, temperatures will rise -- until an equilibrium is reached in which energy is radiated from the object (the atmosphere, in this case) at the same rate at which it is absorbed. Only if the energy is reflected (i.e., if the Earth's albedo is increased) will lower temperatures result.
The author of the wikipedia article you linked understands this:
It is thought that the water droplets in clouds coalesce around the particles, resulting in the clouds consisting of a greater number of smaller droplets, which in turn makes them more reflective: bouncing more sunlight back into space.
How about we do it this way: Get two people on one side of the cow. They simultaneously strike the cow's legs on that side at the backs of the knees. Anyone who's ever done this to somebody standing with their weight shifted onto one leg (or had it done to them) knows what I'm talking about.
The trick is for the perpetrators to get out of the way FAST, because the cow will be falling towards them...
"Lack of evidence to the contrary" is all evolution has as well.
No it isn't. Evidence supporting evolution is there in the fossil record as well as in contemporary observed instances.
Now, it's always possible to interpret that same evidence in some way that doesn't contradict ID, such as the failed experiments of the conjectural designers. That is about as close as you can come to saying there's a "lack of evidence to the contrary" of ID: it doesn't contradict ID (when interpreted according to such a hypothesis), but it doesn't support it either, because support for ID requires evidence of the existence and actions of the designers, in addition to evidence that modern species did not exist from the beginning of time. This is Occam's razor: Not that multiplication of entities is a fallacy, but that the introduction of new entities calls for supporting evidence. It's a simple rule of fairness! The fossil evidence doesn't support the existence of an entity that was responsible for designing the species that populate this planet.
Science can't prove anything, it can just not disprove things.
...which has nothing to do with the passage you were responding to. Saying that evidence supports something is not the same as saying that something is proven. Contrapositively, saying a statement cannot be proven does not imply lack of supporting evidence for that statement. I can't prove OJ did it, but there sure was a lot of supporting evidence for the accusation.
Either you haven't seriously tried Wine in the last five years, in which case your comment is utterly pointless, or you have, in which case it is pure BS.
I've been running Quicken under Wine for years, upgrading every three to six months. Some versions of Wine have not worked as well than others (as the article points out, stuff gets fixed and broken all over again) but the last CVS version I got (20050725) was pretty smooth. I'm looking forward to the beta.
I can't comment on any other large Windows-based apps because that's the only one I still run anymore (thanks to Gimp, OpenOffice, etc.). One smaller app that I run with Wine occasionally is SkyMap, and it works well also.
No, I think what GGP originally referred to (perhaps with some lack of clarity) is the theory that one or both of the creation stories in Genesis (there are two separate and inconsistent stories) were written after the book of Job (and in fact after many of the books of the Old Testament). Because of common elements in Babylonian and Jewish writings it is highly likely that one is derivative ot the other (including the concept of Satan). Job may have been written during the Babylonian exile. The creation stories may have been written after the exile. What's significant is not the supposed order of events related in the two stories, but the fact that the Job author had a different concept of Satan than the Genesis authors. It doesn't follow that the Job story was pre-fall if its author didn't believe in the fall in the first place.
As a curse word becomes used quite commonly, it loses its taboo sense -- that is, it becomes more acceptable. The taboo sense no longer being in play, the original, or even a different meaning, can then fill the vopid left by the faded taboo sense.
As they're fond of saying in the 22nd century, that is the shit-piss truth.
I have found the Prius very sensitive to driving style. In stop and creep driving, shutting off the AC makes a big difference in engine run time.
I should have been more clear. By "style" I was narrowly referring to speed, acceleration, and braking, not to things like the use of accessories. I also said "less sensitive than other vehicles", so this is relative.
The Prius should be less sensitive to cruising speed than many other vehicles, due to its lower coefficient of drag (assuming cross section area is the same). I do find Prius mileage drops off considerably above 70 MPH, but with some vehicles, a similar drop might occur at lower speeds (maybe around 60 MPH). I don't have any hard data so this admittedly is more of an intuition.
I don't know of any particular reason for the Prius to be less sensitive to acceleration from a stop, but I've tried accelerating slowly and quickly, as well as in between. Personally I haven't seen any difference in mileage between these styles.
Of the three factors I listed above, I suspect braking style (meaning the combined use of the brake pedal, regenerative braking, and engine braking) has the most impact on fuel economy. Again I have no hard data, but mileage should be best with maximum use of regenerative braking. Of course this also implies that you will burn less gas between the time you notice a stop sign or red light, and the time you arrive at the intersection -- a double benefit. It may even be a triple benefit because if you slow down early, traffic lights are more likely to turn green by the time you arrive, making a full stop unnecessary. But two of these three benefits also apply to non-hybrids.
Country roads with a few stop signs are where I got my best mileage. 25-45MPH driving does meet the better mileage than freeway driving expectation.
Agreed, that mirrors my experience, and it supports my point, because driving 25-45 MPH without stops is a lot closer to the EPA's test profile for highway driving, than it is to the city profile. (Incidentally, with only 22 stop/starts in a 30 minute test, that city profile sure looks better than my commute). Alas, here in Southern California I rarely have the opportunity to drive any significant distance under those conditions. I did experience this on a recent trip to Phoenix; the traffic lights are much friendlier there.
Actually, physics tells us that the mass of a molecule does include the bonding energy, although since it is a negative value (relative to the potential energy of free atoms) GP should have said "minus the potential energy in the bonds": breaking the bonds raises the potential energy. The reason they didn't mention this in your high-school chemistry class is that the change in mass in any chemical reaction is many, many orders of magnitude less than the mass of the reactants -- too small to measure, and of no practical importance in the field of chemistry.
If you could measure these tiny differences, then you would find that any object has more mass when hot than when cold. The products of an exothermic reaction will initially be hotter than the original reactants, but this (hot) mass will be exactly the same as the (cooler) mass of the original reactants. Once the heat is radiated or conducted away, and you return to the starting temperature, the mass of the products will be ever so slightly less than what you started with.
Most cars have a lower EPA rating for in town driving. The Prius has a higher rating for in town driving.
My understanding is that the higher city rating for the Prius comes from the fudge factors applied by the EPA to the test results, to bring the results from the test profile closer to what most drivers will experience. The multiplier for the city adustment is larger than that for the highway adjustment. Apparently, when the Prius was tested, the two test ratings (before the multipliers were applied) were very close, but lower (or perhaps only *slightly* higher) in city. The "inversion" came about when the adjustments were applied. But the Prius is less sensitive to driving style than other vehicles (in my experience, at least!) so the fudge factors may not be accurate for the Prius. I suspect most Prius drivers get better mileage on the highway than in the city; I know I do.
Slashdot Mirror
An iPod doesn't have a headphone plug. It has a headphone jack. So if the room also has a headphone jack, what do you plug into it? Headphones? And what is connected to it behind the wall? An iPod?
Everyone except Colin Powell, you mean?
I, for one, appreciate the shorthand, and I do touch-type.
Seeing that it missed me completely, and hit the ground instead, I'd have to say "No".
The DVD came out today (Dec. 20), and this article appeared in the print edition of Entertainment Weekly last Friday (Dec. 16).
An analogy that is not a comparison is like a car that is not an automobile.
Excuse me, but it just sounds like an oxymoron begging for a punch line.
in the spirit of Festivus, of course!
So you're saying they should have published this a year ago, when they first learned of it. Hey, I agree!
Manipulated intelligence, you mean. This was reported by Knight-Ridder long before the Downing Street memo came to light; in fact it was reported even before the illegal invasion itself.
Like that helicopter, for instance.
What's more unsettling is that somebody cared enough about Dokken to put up an article about them in the first place.
P.S. This is nitpicking, but that statement wouldn't come under the heading of slander, it would come under libel (assuming it meets the legal tests for that, which you and I don't have the factual information to determine).
Stated this way it's almost a tautology. I say "almost" because there are too many chaotic factors that could inject noise into the system. People buy and sell stocks for other reasons than market expectations. Actual expectations (as an aggregate of market forces) are hard to quantify, so EMH remains a hypothesis.
If energy is absorbed, temperatures will rise -- until an equilibrium is reached in which energy is radiated from the object (the atmosphere, in this case) at the same rate at which it is absorbed. Only if the energy is reflected (i.e., if the Earth's albedo is increased) will lower temperatures result.
The author of the wikipedia article you linked understands this:
It is thought that the water droplets in clouds coalesce around the particles, resulting in the clouds consisting of a greater number of smaller droplets, which in turn makes them more reflective: bouncing more sunlight back into space.
The trick is for the perpetrators to get out of the way FAST, because the cow will be falling towards them...
No it isn't. Evidence supporting evolution is there in the fossil record as well as in contemporary observed instances.
Now, it's always possible to interpret that same evidence in some way that doesn't contradict ID, such as the failed experiments of the conjectural designers. That is about as close as you can come to saying there's a "lack of evidence to the contrary" of ID: it doesn't contradict ID (when interpreted according to such a hypothesis), but it doesn't support it either, because support for ID requires evidence of the existence and actions of the designers, in addition to evidence that modern species did not exist from the beginning of time. This is Occam's razor: Not that multiplication of entities is a fallacy, but that the introduction of new entities calls for supporting evidence. It's a simple rule of fairness! The fossil evidence doesn't support the existence of an entity that was responsible for designing the species that populate this planet.
Science can't prove anything, it can just not disprove things.
So by disembracing (is that a word?) a format, perhaps he is signaling approval?
Either you haven't seriously tried Wine in the last five years, in which case your comment is utterly pointless, or you have, in which case it is pure BS.
I've been running Quicken under Wine for years, upgrading every three to six months. Some versions of Wine have not worked as well than others (as the article points out, stuff gets fixed and broken all over again) but the last CVS version I got (20050725) was pretty smooth. I'm looking forward to the beta.
I can't comment on any other large Windows-based apps because that's the only one I still run anymore (thanks to Gimp, OpenOffice, etc.). One smaller app that I run with Wine occasionally is SkyMap, and it works well also.
And, define "successfully".
No, I think what GGP originally referred to (perhaps with some lack of clarity) is the theory that one or both of the creation stories in Genesis (there are two separate and inconsistent stories) were written after the book of Job (and in fact after many of the books of the Old Testament). Because of common elements in Babylonian and Jewish writings it is highly likely that one is derivative ot the other (including the concept of Satan). Job may have been written during the Babylonian exile. The creation stories may have been written after the exile. What's significant is not the supposed order of events related in the two stories, but the fact that the Job author had a different concept of Satan than the Genesis authors. It doesn't follow that the Job story was pre-fall if its author didn't believe in the fall in the first place.
As they're fond of saying in the 22nd century, that is the shit-piss truth.
My third paragraph should state 76 hp for the ICE, and 67 hp for the electric. Horsepower, not watts!
I should have been more clear. By "style" I was narrowly referring to speed, acceleration, and braking, not to things like the use of accessories. I also said "less sensitive than other vehicles", so this is relative.
The Prius should be less sensitive to cruising speed than many other vehicles, due to its lower coefficient of drag (assuming cross section area is the same). I do find Prius mileage drops off considerably above 70 MPH, but with some vehicles, a similar drop might occur at lower speeds (maybe around 60 MPH). I don't have any hard data so this admittedly is more of an intuition.
I don't know of any particular reason for the Prius to be less sensitive to acceleration from a stop, but I've tried accelerating slowly and quickly, as well as in between. Personally I haven't seen any difference in mileage between these styles.
Of the three factors I listed above, I suspect braking style (meaning the combined use of the brake pedal, regenerative braking, and engine braking) has the most impact on fuel economy. Again I have no hard data, but mileage should be best with maximum use of regenerative braking. Of course this also implies that you will burn less gas between the time you notice a stop sign or red light, and the time you arrive at the intersection -- a double benefit. It may even be a triple benefit because if you slow down early, traffic lights are more likely to turn green by the time you arrive, making a full stop unnecessary. But two of these three benefits also apply to non-hybrids.
Country roads with a few stop signs are where I got my best mileage. 25-45MPH driving does meet the better mileage than freeway driving expectation.
Agreed, that mirrors my experience, and it supports my point, because driving 25-45 MPH without stops is a lot closer to the EPA's test profile for highway driving, than it is to the city profile. (Incidentally, with only 22 stop/starts in a 30 minute test, that city profile sure looks better than my commute). Alas, here in Southern California I rarely have the opportunity to drive any significant distance under those conditions. I did experience this on a recent trip to Phoenix; the traffic lights are much friendlier there.
If you could measure these tiny differences, then you would find that any object has more mass when hot than when cold. The products of an exothermic reaction will initially be hotter than the original reactants, but this (hot) mass will be exactly the same as the (cooler) mass of the original reactants. Once the heat is radiated or conducted away, and you return to the starting temperature, the mass of the products will be ever so slightly less than what you started with.
My understanding is that the higher city rating for the Prius comes from the fudge factors applied by the EPA to the test results, to bring the results from the test profile closer to what most drivers will experience. The multiplier for the city adustment is larger than that for the highway adjustment. Apparently, when the Prius was tested, the two test ratings (before the multipliers were applied) were very close, but lower (or perhaps only *slightly* higher) in city. The "inversion" came about when the adjustments were applied. But the Prius is less sensitive to driving style than other vehicles (in my experience, at least!) so the fudge factors may not be accurate for the Prius. I suspect most Prius drivers get better mileage on the highway than in the city; I know I do.