When my car had a bad thermostat the mileage (and power) of the car dropped significantly. This was during the winter. After replacing the thermostat, efficiency and power were back up!
Of course I'm not in the UK (even if I was wouldn't i be concerned with km/litre instead of m/g?) Anyhoo I drive a 2003 VW Jetta Wagon TDI (manual transmission) and according to fueleconomy.gov (http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=18793), the car gets 35 mpg city 45 mpg (avg 39) highway. From my experience it never gets less than 50mpg on highways (close to 60 driving between CT and NH), but now that I live in the city, with traffic jams, waiting several light changes in queues to make a turn, etc, I'm consistently stuck in the 40s.
Based on feedback from a small number drivers my car gets an average 48.3 mpg (with some reporting as high as 62mpg). So I have no clue why new EPA estimates are considered "more realistic" although they claim make their claims here: http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg... My suspicion is that it's just a way to make newer cars (which aren't as good in terms of economy), look better relative to old cars which are more affordable.
you will spend $0 and while some of the VHS players you get won't be work well, you are bound to get a decent one. A VHS head cleaner tape is not a bad idea though. http://www.amazon.com/CleanDr-...
Interesting chart-slideshow, but I don't see how it's relevant. I don't mean any disrespect, but that is completely unrelated to my question. What I was asking is more specific, "how are handguns primarily defensive weapons?". There seems to be an attempt to classify rifles as offensive and handguns as defensive.
Clearly bulletproof vests/bulletproof glass/etc are defensive technologies. Firearms are offensive techologies.
If concealed handguns aren't being used "defensively", then what are they all being used for? Whatever it is, it sure isn't crime.
I actually don't understand this at all. Concealed handguns are not used. If they are used, they are no longer concealed handguns (or else your clothes and body would likely be damaged.
By the way: major crimes in this country are DOWN a full 50% from 20 years ago, and even more compared to 30 years ago. During that entire time, per-capita gun ownership (including handguns) has gone steadily up, [postimg.org]and "concealed carry" has virtually exploded over that same period. Watch that chart for a moment. (Note: blue in that chart very much does NOT mean "blue state".)
I don't really have bandwidth to fact-check this. There are a lot of trends and correlation is not necessarily causation. Mass shootings are defintiely on the rise in this country as are metal detectors in high schools. Also a lot of professional criminals are moving from physical to virtual crimes which may involve less gun violence.
From a practical perspective, I don't thiink a handgun or a rifle will do you very much good against the KGB. Oppressive regimes tend to have military dominance and unless private citizens own tanks and missile launchers (a recipe for disaster), nonviolent social change will have to be the avenue of reform at a citizen level.
So I'm not a police officer or a weapons expert. However it seems to me handguns are not a defensive technology. Their primary purpose is to kill someone. A bulletproof vest I would agree is a defensive technology. But I guess as a culture we have gotten used to doublespeak with terms such as "peacekeeper missile" so your use of the language is not unusual.
As far as I know, police officers carry handguns as an offensive technology to attack dangerous criminals. They use bullet proof vests to protect against bullet attacks. http://www.merriam-webster.com...
Officially, sure - but I'm sure NRA leaders go on "hunting retreats" in moutain resorts funded by industry leaders and get all kinds of unofficial bribes. "Where is the proof?", you ask. I respond to this by adding an extra layer of foil to my hat.
Exoskeletons no, because the arms would be bearing you and we don't have the right to be borne by arms. Cybernetic arms (as in upper torso appendages) yes, but not legs or feet unless you walk on your hands.
Does your state have a ballot iniative process? Put forward an initiative that the people vote on instead of the politicians!
Once idea would be to try to pass legislation that limited the salaries of politicians (including the income that they could recieve as gifts) and their family members too (definitely spouses) for time during office and for the next 10 years. You want to be a politcian? Fine, but you have to live like a grad student or a Peace Corps worker to do it.
This is part of a nutritional myth that was widely believed in the 60's. It is true that you need to get 8 essential amino acids (not 9), but in the 60's people believed you had to get 8 amino acids in every meal, so "protein complementarity" was a big deal with vegetarians in the West (not so much in ancient vegetarian cultures). What we now know is that while it's true you need to get your protein from different sources to get the amino acid coverage (other than some complete plant-based proteins like soy), it is not necessary to balance them in each meal. So if you have whole wheat toast (without peanut butter) for breakfast, and peanut butter on apples for lunch, that's a complete protein. Or if you eat red beans for dinner Tuesday and rice noodles for dinner Wednesday, that's also a complete protein. In the 60s you might have been taught that the peanut butter and bread had to be paired into a delicious sandwich or that the rice and beans had to be eaten together or you would risk catastrophic health consequences.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P... Unless you are a spreadsheet addict, it is a waste of time to study protein complementarity. It turns out if you eat a plant based diet of varied sources (ie not only eating 1 thing all of the time), there is no protein problem whatsoever. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P...
I love plain tofu. Cut uncooked tofu into bitsize bits for chopsticking, dip in a little toasted sesame oil and soy sauce and bam! Flavor explosion with absolutely zero work:)
Also oven bake in canola oil and soy sauce until firm and win:)
I'm all for fanciful tofu cooking too, but it's really not needed or something I have time for.
As far as Mexico is concerned the gun homicide is not independent of US. In fact lax gun laws and huge drug demand in the US coupled with extreme economic disparity is creates this gun-toting criminal network in Mexico responsible for all the killings.
Other stable and developed countries like England and Australia have unfortunately had mass shootings like the US, and result was stricted gun laws and less gun deaths. As far as sound public policy is concerned, it makes sense to keep guns out of the hands of stupid an irresponsible people.
As far as keeping the King in check, gun owners do very little for that (who did more to influence the NSA all the gun owners in Texas or Edward Snowden). Voting and involvement in the political process is a lot more valuable than irresponsible posession of dangerous firearms.
I recall the biggest food challenge for me at the university was that food was so expensive at the university and around it. I had cheap food at home but didn't often have time to pack a lunch. And with the 30 minute shuttlebus to get to main campus from the cheap parking lot, anything I ate would have to be walking distance or carried with me the entire day. I pined for NYC bodegas where you can get a roll for $0.50 or something cheap just to tide you over until you get home. I went hungry many long days, but thanks to both subsidized and unsubsidized loans and a little bit of income, I wasn't starving.
Unfortunately Gnome 3 pushed me back to ovlwm and xfce. I have a feeling there are a significant number of users (and posters in this thread) in my situation.
It's a little sad because a few years ago, the Linux Desktop was really really great (especially with Gnome 2 + compiz fusion). These days, I really don't feel that way. I wish I could get myself to like KDE.
Wasn't Sun the primary funder of Gnome development?
Honestly if there were barriers to creating a semi-monopolistic software monoculture, I don't think that would necessarily be a bad thing.
But two swing out of the realm of opinion, you compare Windows XP to "OpenSource darlings like firefox" whose long-term support is measured in "months, not years". This is a bad comparison. A better comparison would be Ubuntu LTS which includes firefox and whose support is measured in years not months. However Canonical having only a fraction of a percent of the marketshare that Windows XP does, is not making a business model in supporting releases for over 14 years.
The key difference is any independent software vendor can with a very low barrier to entry. At my previous employer we had production software stack (purchased from a company) which dependent on Redhat 7.3 (not RHEL 7), but you know the one with 2.4 kernel from the 90s. Of course it was impossible to get updates from Redhat, but I made the vendor provide tested procedures for upgrading zlib and openssh and it was possible for them to do this.
I think it would be a great idea to require Microsoft to "open up" even if it was outside of their interests. Hell if Windows 8 could not compete with community supported open source XP, it still means that people get better software:)
These devices are designed to be jailbroken. The root switch involved a special keystroke on boot. It is fairly easy to put whatever you want on the Samsung Chromebook (I know very little about the chromebox but i think it has a physical "developer" switch). My Samsung Chromebook runs Ubuntu like a champ, but the touchpad is quite wonky and the hardware is just not the level of quality I'm used to. I'm tempted to trade up for an ASUS chromebook. x86 compatibility would also open up the possibility of using binary only apps (like Skype) and running Windows VMs.
what about usd? doesn't their production, maintenance and operation require large amounts of resources. What with counterfeiters getting more sophisticated, maintenance of the currency amounts to a "press technology and police pissing contest"
I still wouldn't accept payment in the form of bitcoins.
We still have the self-checkout at Stop and Shop in Connecticut and every BJs I've ever been to. Often times using it will help you avoid waiting in a large queue. I can see automation creeping in (people order takeout/delivery online and even in-person in wawas). Idiocracy might be happening sooner than we think!
I agree with your end goal, but if in our current economic model, the basic necessities of life (assuming we're talking stuff like taco Bell) were fully automated, former fast food workers would be unable to eat. The parent corporation has no business interest in operating a charity for their displaced workforce. I do still think minimum wage should be higher. It's expensive to live in this world.
Slashdot Mirror
All I'm saying is I only hire lawyers who buy me Chinese food every day!
When my car had a bad thermostat the mileage (and power) of the car dropped significantly. This was during the winter. After replacing the thermostat, efficiency and power were back up!
Of course I'm not in the UK (even if I was wouldn't i be concerned with km/litre instead of m/g?) Anyhoo I drive a 2003 VW Jetta Wagon TDI (manual transmission) and according to fueleconomy.gov (http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=18793), the car gets 35 mpg city 45 mpg (avg 39) highway. From my experience it never gets less than 50mpg on highways (close to 60 driving between CT and NH), but now that I live in the city, with traffic jams, waiting several light changes in queues to make a turn, etc, I'm consistently stuck in the 40s.
This is different than fueleconomy's original rating of my car 42 city/50 (avg 45) hwy. http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg...
Based on feedback from a small number drivers my car gets an average 48.3 mpg (with some reporting as high as 62mpg). So I have no clue why new EPA estimates are considered "more realistic" although they claim make their claims here: http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg...
My suspicion is that it's just a way to make newer cars (which aren't as good in terms of economy), look better relative to old cars which are more affordable.
you will spend $0 and while some of the VHS players you get won't be work well, you are bound to get a decent one. A VHS head cleaner tape is not a bad idea though. http://www.amazon.com/CleanDr-...
Interesting chart-slideshow, but I don't see how it's relevant. I don't mean any disrespect, but that is completely unrelated to my question. What I was asking is more specific, "how are handguns primarily defensive weapons?". There seems to be an attempt to classify rifles as offensive and handguns as defensive.
Clearly bulletproof vests/bulletproof glass/etc are defensive technologies. Firearms are offensive techologies.
If concealed handguns aren't being used "defensively", then what are they all being used for? Whatever it is, it sure isn't crime.
I actually don't understand this at all. Concealed handguns are not used. If they are used, they are no longer concealed handguns (or else your clothes and body would likely be damaged.
By the way: major crimes in this country are DOWN a full 50% from 20 years ago, and even more compared to 30 years ago. During that entire time, per-capita gun ownership (including handguns) has gone steadily up, [postimg.org]and "concealed carry" has virtually exploded over that same period. Watch that chart for a moment. (Note: blue in that chart very much does NOT mean "blue state".)
I don't really have bandwidth to fact-check this. There are a lot of trends and correlation is not necessarily causation. Mass shootings are defintiely on the rise in this country as are metal detectors in high schools. Also a lot of professional criminals are moving from physical to virtual crimes which may involve less gun violence.
Can you explain how a handgun is a defensive weapon? Does it prevent you from being shot like bullet proof vest??
In my opinion (and I guess I agree with at least some others), guns are offensive weapons: http://www.theblaze.com/storie...
From a practical perspective, I don't thiink a handgun or a rifle will do you very much good against the KGB. Oppressive regimes tend to have military dominance and unless private citizens own tanks and missile launchers (a recipe for disaster), nonviolent social change will have to be the avenue of reform at a citizen level.
So I'm not a police officer or a weapons expert. However it seems to me handguns are not a defensive technology. Their primary purpose is to kill someone. A bulletproof vest I would agree is a defensive technology. But I guess as a culture we have gotten used to doublespeak with terms such as "peacekeeper missile" so your use of the language is not unusual.
As far as I know, police officers carry handguns as an offensive technology to attack dangerous criminals. They use bullet proof vests to protect against bullet attacks.
http://www.merriam-webster.com...
Officially, sure - but I'm sure NRA leaders go on "hunting retreats" in moutain resorts funded by industry leaders and get all kinds of unofficial bribes. "Where is the proof?", you ask. I respond to this by adding an extra layer of foil to my hat.
Exoskeletons no, because the arms would be bearing you and we don't have the right to be borne by arms. Cybernetic arms (as in upper torso appendages) yes, but not legs or feet unless you walk on your hands.
Does your state have a ballot iniative process? Put forward an initiative that the people vote on instead of the politicians!
Once idea would be to try to pass legislation that limited the salaries of politicians (including the income that they could recieve as gifts) and their family members too (definitely spouses) for time during office and for the next 10 years. You want to be a politcian? Fine, but you have to live like a grad student or a Peace Corps worker to do it.
This is part of a nutritional myth that was widely believed in the 60's. It is true that you need to get 8 essential amino acids (not 9), but in the 60's people believed you had to get 8 amino acids in every meal, so "protein complementarity" was a big deal with vegetarians in the West (not so much in ancient vegetarian cultures). What we now know is that while it's true you need to get your protein from different sources to get the amino acid coverage (other than some complete plant-based proteins like soy), it is not necessary to balance them in each meal. So if you have whole wheat toast (without peanut butter) for breakfast, and peanut butter on apples for lunch, that's a complete protein. Or if you eat red beans for dinner Tuesday and rice noodles for dinner Wednesday, that's also a complete protein. In the 60s you might have been taught that the peanut butter and bread had to be paired into a delicious sandwich or that the rice and beans had to be eaten together or you would risk catastrophic health consequences.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P...
Unless you are a spreadsheet addict, it is a waste of time to study protein complementarity. It turns out if you eat a plant based diet of varied sources (ie not only eating 1 thing all of the time), there is no protein problem whatsoever. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P...
Sorry just replying to undo bad moderation. Didn't mean to "bug" you :)
I love plain tofu. Cut uncooked tofu into bitsize bits for chopsticking, dip in a little toasted sesame oil and soy sauce and bam! Flavor explosion with absolutely zero work :)
Also oven bake in canola oil and soy sauce until firm and win :)
I'm all for fanciful tofu cooking too, but it's really not needed or something I have time for.
It's usually injected salt water: http://nutritionfacts.org/vide...
You must be one of the 5% with a masters of analytics!
Japan is stable and developed and not majority white. Also has very good gun control and very few gun deaths. I must be a racist!
Russia has strict gun laws? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/O...
As far as Mexico is concerned the gun homicide is not independent of US. In fact lax gun laws and huge drug demand in the US coupled with extreme economic disparity is creates this gun-toting criminal network in Mexico responsible for all the killings.
Other stable and developed countries like England and Australia have unfortunately had mass shootings like the US, and result was stricted gun laws and less gun deaths. As far as sound public policy is concerned, it makes sense to keep guns out of the hands of stupid an irresponsible people.
As far as keeping the King in check, gun owners do very little for that (who did more to influence the NSA all the gun owners in Texas or Edward Snowden). Voting and involvement in the political process is a lot more valuable than irresponsible posession of dangerous firearms.
I recall the biggest food challenge for me at the university was that food was so expensive at the university and around it. I had cheap food at home but didn't often have time to pack a lunch. And with the 30 minute shuttlebus to get to main campus from the cheap parking lot, anything I ate would have to be walking distance or carried with me the entire day. I pined for NYC bodegas where you can get a roll for $0.50 or something cheap just to tide you over until you get home. I went hungry many long days, but thanks to both subsidized and unsubsidized loans and a little bit of income, I wasn't starving.
Unfortunately Gnome 3 pushed me back to ovlwm and xfce. I have a feeling there are a significant number of users (and posters in this thread) in my situation.
It's a little sad because a few years ago, the Linux Desktop was really really great (especially with Gnome 2 + compiz fusion). These days, I really don't feel that way. I wish I could get myself to like KDE.
Wasn't Sun the primary funder of Gnome development?
Honestly if there were barriers to creating a semi-monopolistic software monoculture, I don't think that would necessarily be a bad thing.
But two swing out of the realm of opinion, you compare Windows XP to "OpenSource darlings like firefox" whose long-term support is measured in "months, not years". This is a bad comparison. A better comparison would be Ubuntu LTS which includes firefox and whose support is measured in years not months. However Canonical having only a fraction of a percent of the marketshare that Windows XP does, is not making a business model in supporting releases for over 14 years.
The key difference is any independent software vendor can with a very low barrier to entry. At my previous employer we had production software stack (purchased from a company) which dependent on Redhat 7.3 (not RHEL 7), but you know the one with 2.4 kernel from the 90s. Of course it was impossible to get updates from Redhat, but I made the vendor provide tested procedures for upgrading zlib and openssh and it was possible for them to do this.
I think it would be a great idea to require Microsoft to "open up" even if it was outside of their interests. Hell if Windows 8 could not compete with community supported open source XP, it still means that people get better software :)
In Russia it seems like government and orthodox church leaders have teamed up to become an unbeatable force http://www.newsweek.com/putins...
These devices are designed to be jailbroken. The root switch involved a special keystroke on boot. It is fairly easy to put whatever you want on the Samsung Chromebook (I know very little about the chromebox but i think it has a physical "developer" switch). My Samsung Chromebook runs Ubuntu like a champ, but the touchpad is quite wonky and the hardware is just not the level of quality I'm used to. I'm tempted to trade up for an ASUS chromebook. x86 compatibility would also open up the possibility of using binary only apps (like Skype) and running Windows VMs.
what about usd? doesn't their production, maintenance and operation require large amounts of resources. What with counterfeiters getting more sophisticated, maintenance of the currency amounts to a "press technology and police pissing contest"
I still wouldn't accept payment in the form of bitcoins.
We still have the self-checkout at Stop and Shop in Connecticut and every BJs I've ever been to. Often times using it will help you avoid waiting in a large queue. I can see automation creeping in (people order takeout/delivery online and even in-person in wawas). Idiocracy might be happening sooner than we think!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
I agree with your end goal, but if in our current economic model, the basic necessities of life (assuming we're talking stuff like taco Bell) were fully automated, former fast food workers would be unable to eat. The parent corporation has no business interest in operating a charity for their displaced workforce.
I do still think minimum wage should be higher. It's expensive to live in this world.