"Donâ(TM)t create black holes. The current theory of what powers them is incorrect.
The true source of a black holes gravitational energy isnâ(TM)t the mass that gets sucked into it. That mass gets destroyed in the singularity. So does the energy it is composed of. It gets destroyed when the gravitational force that sucks it in makes it exceed the speed of light because exceeding the speed of light in space destroys the representation of the Dirac Sea; i.e., it destroys light, energy, matter, and spacetime. The singularity inside a black hole is the only thing that violates the conservation of energy. There is a universal law more powerful than the conservation of energy. That is the conservation of nonexistence. Nonexistence cannot be destroyed because it is nonexistent. It is the lack of existence. The conservation of nonexistence is the first cause of symmetry. It is the cause of dark energy and the cause of the Dirac Sea.
Inside the event horizon of a black hole lies nonexistence. No Dirac Sea. No energy. No space. No time. No dimensions. Black holes are powered by the dark energy difference between the nonexistence inside the black hole and normal space outside it. If you donâ(TM)t know this, there is a finite chance you could destroy the earth. The energy of the Dirac Sea outside the black hole is inexhaustable. It is the most powerful energy source in the universe. We donâ(TM)t know how to contain it.
As far as cosmic rays, the creation of a black hole involves more than energy. The thing that actually triggers the creation of a black hole is energy being forced to exceed the speed of light in free space. Cosmic rays donâ(TM)t do that, unless they get sucked into a black hole.
This is based on research still to be published. Ignore at your peril."
People will still commit crimes even if they know that when caught they will be immediately executed.
And yes, me "and people like me" ARE directly responsible for violent crime. You're right. Really. You're clearly some right-wing-nut.
Pumping money into a poor community isn't really the answer, no doubt it helps, and no doubt keeping crime down helps. I suspect that what is required is for even the shitty jobs to pay reasonably well to provide a comfortable living. This means things like minimum wages and so on. Taxation should be set up to narrow the vast gulf between rich and poor. I'm talking about bringing the gulf in surplus income (after having paid for accommodation, food, transport, utilities, clothing, healthcare) down to a factor of 5 or 10, not 1000 or infinite as it is for those who are living hand to mouth.
In some conditions crime really does pay, and adding extra punishment to crime isn't really the solution so much as adding sufficient reward for doing the right thing.
have they skyrocketed? have they? this is a fact is it? lets see some evidence please. and how many of these violent assaults in australia/britain have been with a gun? versus how many with a less serious (though still serious) weapon such as a knife or similar? now how do the figures pan out in america?
and do these criminals / gang members carry guns themselves? if so are they american or british/australian?
So its a race to the bottom where everybody shoots everybody else on sight.
Maybe the solution instead is to address the social problems that cause people to turn to crime, and to address the impression that there are loads of criminals on the prowl looking for people to shoot.
next BT need to sort out their network architecture so that packets to your mate down the road on the same isp as you go into the local exchange and back out again, instead of go down to the local exchange, get trunked down to the isp's network, back out again to the local exchange and finally to ur mate.
thats cooperative multitasking. it can work but it assumes you've correctly broken down your background file reading into sufficiently (consistently) small pieces. It also assumes that your file io is non-blocking which may not be true for all kinds of IO.
how can synchronisation be worse than multithreaded? at worst it will devolve to the singlethreaded time + the time spent in synchronisation instructions. so yes it could be marginally worse but if there's any benefit at all to be found from parallelisation then it will be better
Slashdot Mirror
"Donâ(TM)t create black holes. The current theory of what powers them is incorrect.
The true source of a black holes gravitational energy isnâ(TM)t the mass that gets sucked into it. That mass gets destroyed in the singularity. So does the energy it is composed of. It gets destroyed when the gravitational force that sucks it in makes it exceed the speed of light because exceeding the speed of light in space destroys the representation of the Dirac Sea; i.e., it destroys light, energy, matter, and spacetime. The singularity inside a black hole is the only thing that violates the conservation of energy. There is a universal law more powerful than the conservation of energy. That is the conservation of nonexistence. Nonexistence cannot be destroyed because it is nonexistent. It is the lack of existence. The conservation of nonexistence is the first cause of symmetry. It is the cause of dark energy and the cause of the Dirac Sea.
Inside the event horizon of a black hole lies nonexistence. No Dirac Sea. No energy. No space. No time. No dimensions. Black holes are powered by the dark energy difference between the nonexistence inside the black hole and normal space outside it. If you donâ(TM)t know this, there is a finite chance you could destroy the earth. The energy of the Dirac Sea outside the black hole is inexhaustable. It is the most powerful energy source in the universe. We donâ(TM)t know how to contain it.
As far as cosmic rays, the creation of a black hole involves more than energy. The thing that actually triggers the creation of a black hole is energy being forced to exceed the speed of light in free space. Cosmic rays donâ(TM)t do that, unless they get sucked into a black hole.
This is based on research still to be published. Ignore at your peril."
People will still commit crimes even if they know that when caught they will be immediately executed.
And yes, me "and people like me" ARE directly responsible for violent crime. You're right. Really. You're clearly some right-wing-nut.
Pumping money into a poor community isn't really the answer, no doubt it helps, and no doubt keeping crime down helps. I suspect that what is required is for even the shitty jobs to pay reasonably well to provide a comfortable living. This means things like minimum wages and so on. Taxation should be set up to narrow the vast gulf between rich and poor. I'm talking about bringing the gulf in surplus income (after having paid for accommodation, food, transport, utilities, clothing, healthcare) down to a factor of 5 or 10, not 1000 or infinite as it is for those who are living hand to mouth.
In some conditions crime really does pay, and adding extra punishment to crime isn't really the solution so much as adding sufficient reward for doing the right thing.
yes
yes!
which country has the highest rate of gun crime? america or other western democracies? is the "solution" the problem?
have they skyrocketed? have they? this is a fact is it? lets see some evidence please.
and how many of these violent assaults in australia/britain have been with a gun? versus how many with a less serious (though still serious) weapon such as a knife or similar? now how do the figures pan out in america?
and do these criminals / gang members carry guns themselves? if so are they american or british/australian?
So its a race to the bottom where everybody shoots everybody else on sight.
Maybe the solution instead is to address the social problems that cause people to turn to crime, and to address the impression that there are loads of criminals on the prowl looking for people to shoot.
its true every project is consumed by someone but still its rather specialist
I'm not 100% sure what "marque" means but I would suggest that gcc is the marque project of open source and has been for about 20 years.
If you take a constitution and call it a treaty, is it a treaty or a constitution?
informative?
I bought thief recently to see what all the fuss was about but I couldn't get into it.
think walking down a busy street with security sound mufflers.
lol.
PC Repair Advisory Tool
maybe if the environment around us was quieter, we wouldn't need to turn our {ipod,discman,walkman} up so loud to block it out!
Verisign is absolutely unsuitable.
ICANN is not a neutral body.
US government is not suitable.
who should it be?
as you say, its useable as an exclamation; however its not interchangeable with the usage of heck in the post under discussion.
if your isp is in london you may for example have smaller pings to france than you do to some sites in the uk.
this is important for online gaming and so on
next BT need to sort out their network architecture so that packets to your mate down the road on the same isp as you go into the local exchange and back out again, instead of go down to the local exchange, get trunked down to the isp's network, back out again to the local exchange and finally to ur mate.
this is not flamebait! moderators are on crack again I think
isn't it just unauthorised access to a computer system?
that's not fraud, it's something else
thats cooperative multitasking. it can work but it assumes you've correctly broken down your background file reading into sufficiently (consistently) small pieces. It also assumes that your file io is non-blocking which may not be true for all kinds of IO.
how can synchronisation be worse than multithreaded? at worst it will devolve to the singlethreaded time + the time spent in synchronisation instructions. so yes it could be marginally worse but if there's any benefit at all to be found from parallelisation then it will be better
also I tried searching for Bleys as a district of Bolton but no joy there either