I always wondered why there is no distinction between macros that only modify the document in which they are embedded, and all other macros.
Say, for instance a letter template that, upon instantiation, sets today's date, then removes all macros from the document.
But then the isotopic composition of the water carried by the comets may have changed since the time when they supposedly brought water to the Earth? It's a long time since, and I would think that hydrogen diffuses more readily than the heavier deuterium.
The article says that the comets are much richer in deuterium than Earth's water. The small inclusions of water in primordial rocks match the isotopic balance of sea water. That is why the comet theory is now relatively disfavored.
But how did the isotopes get differentially distributed in the primordial cloud, so that the deuterium collected in the outer regions where the comets formed, rather than in the region between Jupiter's orbit and the Sun itself?
I have Windows 10 with CMD.EXE. Try right-click on the Windows Logo button (former Start Menu button). The context menu has entries for cmd with and without administrator, as well as powershell with and without admin rights.
As far as I know there is red, iron-rich soil many places on Earth as well.
According to a book I read about Hawaii, an industrious land owner treated car wrecks with sulfuric acid to supply the soil with more iron in order to grow more pineapples.
The system of the daughter consenting or not consenting to paying the expenses, and the funeral at the other end of the communications channel, is an entangled system, such that if you measure if the daughter consents or not, and also measure if the funeral is being held or not, you will either find that both are the case, or none. But the two are not causally related. They are random, but correlated. Some observers see the funeral being held first, and the daughter consenting to paying the expenses being a correlated state, instantaneous-irrespective-of-distance.
You may have misunderstood what technologies he labeled "quantum nonsense".
Quantum entangled particles are not nonsense, but the notion of communication "instantaneous-irrespective-of-distance" is.
Correlated particles have correlated-yet-unpredictable states irrespective of the order of their measurement. But to experience the correlation, you need to measure both. Some observers will observe that measurement A takes place before measurement B, thus the "communication" being "transmitted" from A to B, while other observers (moving at high velocity w.r.t the first observers) will observe the opposite order and the opposite direction of "transmission".
So, if the contents of the "transmission" is "I hereby consent to the charging of my account with the expenses of the funeral of my mother", some observers will see that consent being predetermined by the account being charged with said expenses. This is not what we usually understand by "communication".
Not really. The useful resources available on or near the surface of the earth, chemical and mineral, are dwarfed by the amount of resources floating around on other rocks, asteroids and such, in the solar system.
The usefull resources available on or near the surface of the earth, chemical and mineral, are dwarfed by the amount of resources deeper below the surface of the earth.
Re:Yes, we should give up because it is hard..
on
Let's Not Go To Mars
·
· Score: 1
.. but actually not.
Great discoveries and advancements come about because there are humans willing to try to do hard things. Often when you do those you fail, but in the end when enough tries succeed the humankind is better off.
There have always been naysayers and there will always be naysayers, luckily for us there have been enough people willing to try.
Travel to the moon did not succeed just because enough people kept trying to climb up trees.
Yes, the slide to unlock is an amazing invention. And the word correction feature is worth $102 on a phone that costs $149.
The majority found error in the lower court's requiring that Apple must prove that the infringement was the sole cause of the lost sales.
But the minority opinion points out that the lower court never stated such a requirement. According to the minority, "The words “sole” and “predominant” are not even present in the district court’s opinion."
In technical fields, the level of sloppiness that permeates the work of the courts, is just not possible. Such accidents as the Space Shuttle Challenger disaster, or the sinking of the Sleipner A oil platform in a Norwegian fjord, are, after all quite seldom, and even then, the mistakes leading to the disasters were not nearly as glaringly obvious. In the courts, such mistakes are made every single day, multiple times in almost each and every single court opinion, because it has no consequences for the judges.
In the school's defense, imagine if this were the headline:
"Muslim student detonates bomb in school--school officials said they knew he was carrying a device that looked like a bomb, but didn't say anything because he told them it was a clock."
I bet you would call them stupid then too.
Yes, such headlines would be hard on the school. But what is the likelyhood? Suppose a child shows up with a plastic ruler which has a shining, silvery coating. "Looks like a knife to me!" "Jail that child for three days just in case!" "He may have plans to stab the teachers in the back!" Of course, if the child does stab the teachers and the survivors say they had suspicions but were calmed by the child's statement that it was a plastic ruler, they would also look bad. Yet you have to accept that risk, if life is to be bearable.
You have to realize that it did look like electronics. It didn't look like a bomb, it looked like a circuit board. There are circuit boards in your washing machine, in your vacuum cleaner, in your tv, in your pc, in your clock, in your garage opener, in your tv remote, in your loudspeakers. It did look perfectly like what the boy said it was, and what the boy said was exactly the kind of things that boys tinker with. A teacher should know that much about kids. Perhaps a little unusual that he made it work and sound an alarm, but that pretty much proved that it was an electronic alarm clock. Had it been a bomb, it would have exploded, not sounded.
And if you still fear that the "bomb" may explode, you remove the "bomb" (or have it removed) just in case, but you don't keep the boy in jail for three days. What do you win by keeping the child in handcuffs and bars? Do you think he may suddenly transform into a vampire?
What nobody discusses is this: Why was he arrested? The police should not arrest people randomly. This arrest was not necessary to achieve any justified goal. It only served as punishment, but punishments should be metered by courts, not by police.
The case of Sandra Bland shows that false arrests is a much larger danger to the life and well being of the citizens that the danger of most of the pretextes. This man was not likely to keep shooting. Keeping him over night solved no problem whatsoever.
This alleged vicious circle is partially wrong. The rents are driven by the property prices, which are driven by the interest rates. The lower the interest rates, the cheaper the mortgages, the easier it is to afford a property. But the number of properties does not rise, so then the prices of the properties rise instead. But this will slowly pull you out of the recession. While the recession increases the ratio of renters, the rich always have enough money to participate in the game, and at low interests and low wages (due to the recession) they will start building more houses and become landlords. This will employ construction workers and start a cycle of economic expansion. Rents will come down, salaries will go up, and more people will afford a down payment and abandon the rent market, further lowering the rent levels. But increased activity combined with high property prices will set inflation in motion, driving up the interest rates. Rising interest rates will destroy the finances of the most precarious borrowers leading to series of crises and busts along the road.
Searching ships for contraband is reasonable. Imaging laptops for contraband is not. I haven't RTFA, but I understand from the comments that the officers were not looking for contraband at all, but rather for leads in an ongoing criminal case.
If your country has laws regulating when and how much law enforcement can violate your privacy and your freedom, law enforcement should respect that and not circumvent those laws by abusing regulations made for an entirely different purpose. If lawmakers found it reasonable to set limits to the searching powers of law enforcement when the suspect is inland, why should the balance of interests be any different when the suspect is at the border? That is, unless his being at the border has some relation to the issues.
I can't imagine any circumstances where it's ok for a wanted person to evade capture, while at the same time being given a platform to deliver a lecture to judges.
I think this is the opposite of probity. A judge shall be impartial and have no preconceived opinions. Assange has not been tried, and the prosecution may well be wrong.
Sure, this is not a trial of Assange, and the judges do not have the same obligation to remain neutral toward Assange. They do not want to give the impression of colluding with fugitives, since that could undermine the public confidence in the legal system. But the judges instead give the impression of not understanding, or of pretending not to understand what is going on, and that is well suited to saw doubt about their competence as judges.
Now the judges seem biased in favor of the established powers, blind to the allegations of abuse of powers. I am not reassured.
Slashdot Mirror
From the article:
What does this mean? Could it be that they only can issue certificates for "*.bluecoat.com"?
If so, what is the problem?
If so, why scrub the net of the incident? Why not proudly promote the story?
I always wondered why there is no distinction between macros that only modify the document in which they are embedded, and all other macros. Say, for instance a letter template that, upon instantiation, sets today's date, then removes all macros from the document.
It's the margin that counts.
Menu button - "New Incognito Window"
But then the isotopic composition of the water carried by the comets may have changed since the time when they supposedly brought water to the Earth? It's a long time since, and I would think that hydrogen diffuses more readily than the heavier deuterium.
The article says that the comets are much richer in deuterium than Earth's water. The small inclusions of water in primordial rocks match the isotopic balance of sea water. That is why the comet theory is now relatively disfavored.
But how did the isotopes get differentially distributed in the primordial cloud, so that the deuterium collected in the outer regions where the comets formed, rather than in the region between Jupiter's orbit and the Sun itself?
What do you use transparency for?
I have Windows 10 with CMD.EXE. Try right-click on the Windows Logo button (former Start Menu button). The context menu has entries for cmd with and without administrator, as well as powershell with and without admin rights.
Everybody explaining how hard it is to replace old sw and hw... How come they managed to implement it in the first place?
Build a new system working in parallel with the old one. Adapt the planes to communicate with both systems og switch them over to the new one.
I have the exact same question.
As far as I know there is red, iron-rich soil many places on Earth as well. According to a book I read about Hawaii, an industrious land owner treated car wrecks with sulfuric acid to supply the soil with more iron in order to grow more pineapples.
It is funnier still.
The system of the daughter consenting or not consenting to paying the expenses, and the funeral at the other end of the communications channel, is an entangled system, such that if you measure if the daughter consents or not, and also measure if the funeral is being held or not, you will either find that both are the case, or none. But the two are not causally related. They are random, but correlated. Some observers see the funeral being held first, and the daughter consenting to paying the expenses being a correlated state, instantaneous-irrespective-of-distance.
You may have misunderstood what technologies he labeled "quantum nonsense".
Quantum entangled particles are not nonsense, but the notion of communication "instantaneous-irrespective-of-distance" is.
Correlated particles have correlated-yet-unpredictable states irrespective of the order of their measurement. But to experience the correlation, you need to measure both. Some observers will observe that measurement A takes place before measurement B, thus the "communication" being "transmitted" from A to B, while other observers (moving at high velocity w.r.t the first observers) will observe the opposite order and the opposite direction of "transmission".
So, if the contents of the "transmission" is "I hereby consent to the charging of my account with the expenses of the funeral of my mother", some observers will see that consent being predetermined by the account being charged with said expenses. This is not what we usually understand by "communication".
Not really. The useful resources available on or near the surface of the earth, chemical and mineral, are dwarfed by the amount of resources floating around on other rocks, asteroids and such, in the solar system.
The usefull resources available on or near the surface of the earth, chemical and mineral, are dwarfed by the amount of resources deeper below the surface of the earth.
.. but actually not.
Great discoveries and advancements come about because there are humans willing to try to do hard things. Often when you do those you fail, but in the end when enough tries succeed the humankind is better off.
There have always been naysayers and there will always be naysayers, luckily for us there have been enough people willing to try.
Travel to the moon did not succeed just because enough people kept trying to climb up trees.
There's a very long record of a300 (== a%%30%30) crashes dating back to 1983. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Are you sure? I think a%%30%30 becomes a%300 (where the last % has been escaped and is to be taken as a literal %.)
Yes, the slide to unlock is an amazing invention. And the word correction feature is worth $102 on a phone that costs $149.
The majority found error in the lower court's requiring that Apple must prove that the infringement was the sole cause of the lost sales. But the minority opinion points out that the lower court never stated such a requirement. According to the minority, "The words “sole” and “predominant” are not even present in the district court’s opinion."
In technical fields, the level of sloppiness that permeates the work of the courts, is just not possible. Such accidents as the Space Shuttle Challenger disaster, or the sinking of the Sleipner A oil platform in a Norwegian fjord, are, after all quite seldom, and even then, the mistakes leading to the disasters were not nearly as glaringly obvious. In the courts, such mistakes are made every single day, multiple times in almost each and every single court opinion, because it has no consequences for the judges.
We don't even know if he is a muslim. Just because his name?
In the school's defense, imagine if this were the headline:
"Muslim student detonates bomb in school--school officials said they knew he was carrying a device that looked like a bomb, but didn't say anything because he told them it was a clock."
I bet you would call them stupid then too.
Yes, such headlines would be hard on the school. But what is the likelyhood? Suppose a child shows up with a plastic ruler which has a shining, silvery coating. "Looks like a knife to me!" "Jail that child for three days just in case!" "He may have plans to stab the teachers in the back!" Of course, if the child does stab the teachers and the survivors say they had suspicions but were calmed by the child's statement that it was a plastic ruler, they would also look bad. Yet you have to accept that risk, if life is to be bearable.
You have to realize that it did look like electronics. It didn't look like a bomb, it looked like a circuit board. There are circuit boards in your washing machine, in your vacuum cleaner, in your tv, in your pc, in your clock, in your garage opener, in your tv remote, in your loudspeakers. It did look perfectly like what the boy said it was, and what the boy said was exactly the kind of things that boys tinker with. A teacher should know that much about kids. Perhaps a little unusual that he made it work and sound an alarm, but that pretty much proved that it was an electronic alarm clock. Had it been a bomb, it would have exploded, not sounded.
And if you still fear that the "bomb" may explode, you remove the "bomb" (or have it removed) just in case, but you don't keep the boy in jail for three days. What do you win by keeping the child in handcuffs and bars? Do you think he may suddenly transform into a vampire?
What nobody discusses is this: Why was he arrested? The police should not arrest people randomly. This arrest was not necessary to achieve any justified goal. It only served as punishment, but punishments should be metered by courts, not by police. The case of Sandra Bland shows that false arrests is a much larger danger to the life and well being of the citizens that the danger of most of the pretextes. This man was not likely to keep shooting. Keeping him over night solved no problem whatsoever.
Why would gay marriage lead to more children being raised without their mothers?
This alleged vicious circle is partially wrong. The rents are driven by the property prices, which are driven by the interest rates. The lower the interest rates, the cheaper the mortgages, the easier it is to afford a property. But the number of properties does not rise, so then the prices of the properties rise instead. But this will slowly pull you out of the recession. While the recession increases the ratio of renters, the rich always have enough money to participate in the game, and at low interests and low wages (due to the recession) they will start building more houses and become landlords. This will employ construction workers and start a cycle of economic expansion. Rents will come down, salaries will go up, and more people will afford a down payment and abandon the rent market, further lowering the rent levels. But increased activity combined with high property prices will set inflation in motion, driving up the interest rates. Rising interest rates will destroy the finances of the most precarious borrowers leading to series of crises and busts along the road.
Searching ships for contraband is reasonable. Imaging laptops for contraband is not. I haven't RTFA, but I understand from the comments that the officers were not looking for contraband at all, but rather for leads in an ongoing criminal case.
If your country has laws regulating when and how much law enforcement can violate your privacy and your freedom, law enforcement should respect that and not circumvent those laws by abusing regulations made for an entirely different purpose. If lawmakers found it reasonable to set limits to the searching powers of law enforcement when the suspect is inland, why should the balance of interests be any different when the suspect is at the border? That is, unless his being at the border has some relation to the issues.
I can't imagine any circumstances where it's ok for a wanted person to evade capture, while at the same time being given a platform to deliver a lecture to judges.
I can!
I think this is the opposite of probity. A judge shall be impartial and have no preconceived opinions. Assange has not been tried, and the prosecution may well be wrong.
Sure, this is not a trial of Assange, and the judges do not have the same obligation to remain neutral toward Assange. They do not want to give the impression of colluding with fugitives, since that could undermine the public confidence in the legal system. But the judges instead give the impression of not understanding, or of pretending not to understand what is going on, and that is well suited to saw doubt about their competence as judges.
Now the judges seem biased in favor of the established powers, blind to the allegations of abuse of powers. I am not reassured.