I believe the GP is referring to the Epistles, which (a) do make up the bulk of the NT, and (b) don't involve events, but rather mostly describe how members of the early Christian community were to live.
There is a legitimate argument to be made that Christianity isn't Christ's religion, but rather Paul's. Paul certainly spread his influence by sending letters to the far reaches of the empire.
To expand upon what the AC above says, here is a copy of the Pennsylvania Traffic Laws. The word conviction appears 14 times.
One example:
3362. Maximum speed limits. (a) General rule.--Except when a special hazard exists that requires lower speed for compliance with section 3361 (relating to driving vehicle at safe speed), the limits specified in this section or established under this subchapter shall be maximum lawful speeds and no person shall drive a vehicle at a speed in excess of the following maximum limits:
... (c) Penalty.-- (1) Any person violating this section is guilty of a summary offense and shall, upon conviction, be sentenced to pay a fine of: ...
emphasis mine Now I don't know anything about the database Hemo uses to do his job, but you most certainly can be convicted of minor infractions. Whether a traffic violation, jaywalking, or littering is a criminal offense apparently varies by jurisdiction
But according to hemo,
If you were convicted of a criminal offence, it's going to show up on your record no matter what
So, it would appear that depending on where you live, and how they handle minor infractions, there is a good chance that any littering convictions that you carry might be visible to any border guard in any country you ever travel to.
Notice the phrase Hemo uses is conviction, not arrest. You can be convicted of speeding, jaywalking, and littering, without ever having been arrested.
IMO, the people maintaining this list should be making a case by case judgment after the conviction whether or not the accused was a violent offender. In this case, the weatherman would be a yes, and non-violent protesters would be a no. Even if they were both charged and convicted of trespass.
While we're having this argument about how only people who understand the constitution should be able to vote, I'd like to suggest that before anyone go any further regarding the separation of church and state they pull up the text of the constitution and search for relevant phrases.
Now this might spoil the ending, but the closest you're going to get is
Article. VI. no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.
and
Amendment I Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof
True, the spanish flu killed more people than any particular small pox outbreak and possibly more than even the black death, but as a percentage of the population both were far deadlier. Sure some specific populations were more affected by one or the other, but there were instances of 100% mortality from small pox as well, fertile flood plains along the mississippi were conspicuously empty when european explorers finally made it that far inland, because their germs preceded them.
Spanish flu - 2-20% population killed in most affected areas (damn near everywhere) Black death - 30-60% population killed in most affected areas (eurasia) Small pox - 70-95% population of affected area killed (americas)
Everyone hears "flu pandemic" and they think 1918, which was the worst in history
Well only if you don't count the black death, which killed 30-60% of the population of Europe, or the Small Pox pandemic which possibly killed upwards of 70% of Native Americans and advanced faster and was more ruthless than the conquering European armies.
Isn't Manhattan, being an island, above sea level? Remember the hysteria that broke when some would be (incompetent) terrorists were caught plotting to blow up the Lincoln Tunnel in order to flood Manhattan? After about 2 days of panic some one finally got on the news and told everyone it couldn't possibly happen, as water tends to not run uphill.
I'm pretty sure volatile is code for, "blah blah blah experts blah blah science." Isn't that all Joe Public should need to accept something that at is least counter-intuitive, and at worst physically impossible, all because Uncle Sam says so.
So yes, volatile can mean something other than will explode immediately, but no other meanings make their statement make any sense either
The thing is lighters are permitted to be carried on. You can also bring full sized bottles of liquor (up to 5 I believe) aboard a plane, provided you bought it at a duty free shop.
Yeah, but why would a substance with a high vapor pressure be a problem to a would be terrorist? Either the vapor pressure is so high that you literally could not combine small containers without most of it evaporating, in which case all your containers are going to have to be thick walled pressure vessels to begin with in order to contain it. I'm not one to put too much faith in the TSA myself, but even I would think that they'd notice a 1Q plastic zip-lock bag with seven 3oz. high pressure containers. The other possibility is that the fumes are highly noxious, and any attempted mixing would knock out or kill anyone opening the containers. Unless it is an immediate effect, I don't think a terrorist with a mind for taking down a plane is going to care that he is going to die from being poisoned in a few hours. If it could immediately incapacitate someone - to the point they couldn't assemble a bomb, then you don't need a bomb, you just need to open the container near the cockpit door, and wait for the plane to drop out of the sky.
Heh after following your link, and a couple more, I got to this page where the TSA defends its current policy on liquids at check points.
This is a gem
We also paid close attention to the idea of terrorists combining multiple small bottles in a larger container or combining many small bottles together after going through the checkpoint. Due to the extreme volatility of liquid explosives, the international consensus was that those scenarios don't represent a significant threat.
So imagine, a terrorist is on a plane with seven three once bottles, and is prepared to blow up both the plane and himself. Fortunately, he wouldn't dare try to combine the liquids into a large container, because the chemicals are extremely volatile, and there might be some sort of explosion...
See that's a common misconception. Actually Bach pioneered the micropayment financial system when he used Germany's ubiquitous surveillance to monitor and debit 5 pfennig from the bank account anyone caught humming any portion of "Christ lag in Todesbanden"
The other important class of invention where this does not apply is where the inventor (or an operator under a NDA) is the only one using the invention. This could be basically every piece of industrial equipment ever invented. The shirt isn't a secret, but the loom is.
One of the nuances of the free market that really bit the airlines (and the auto industry) in the ass is that businesses require employees, and employees demand benefits. As your employees retire, you cease to benefit from them, but they continue to cost you money. Since a new airline doesn't have that kind of overhead, they can undercut you on price, and the cold free market would dictates that those established companies go belly-up, and leave their pensioners SOL.
Sure, maybe the new businesses have better structured pension plans, that aren't going to force them into bankruptcy in fifty years, and the "market" wins, but all those senior citizens with suddenly zero income sure is a lot of unpleasant collateral damage.
Protecting pensions is a big part of the reason that the government bailed out united and gm.
And yes, 401k's are great - at least mostly and thusfar, but they didn't exist in 1950.
Re:This is HIGHLY illegal in the US
on
eBay The Vote
·
· Score: 1
Cutting taxes across the board are sometimes good for economics. If the state of Michigan cut taxes across the board (instead of raising the sales tax) the government still would not be functioning. A nonfunctioning government is decidedly bad for the economy. Cutting government spending can be good for the economy, of course if the department of the treasury cut spending on the Secret Service unit that pursues counterfeiters, it is very possible that there would be an influx of counterfeit money. Counterfeit money is generally a negative for the economy.
You, my libertarian (anarchist?) friend seem to be under the misguided notion that less government is always better government. In reality, where we need police, roads, schools, and corporate, health, and banking regulators, and even (gasp) an army, some government actions are actually good things. The trick is to tax and spend at the right amount. I'm not convinced that the right tax burden is less than what it currently is, nor am I convinced that we shouldn't be spending more government (taxpayer) money on projects like universal healthcare. What I am convinced of is that a large portion of the money that the government spends is spent unwisely. Of course, if we could all agree on which dollars are the unwise ones, we wouldn't be in this mess to start with.
In other words, the solution isn't as simple as what you suggest, and even if it were, you couldn't convince enough people that you're right to do something about it.
Alright, I'm not a networking guy by any means, but how exactly is WoW supposed to open up ports on my router? I'm not even going to pretend to understand why they can't use ports that don't need to be explicitly forwarded, but I'd have major problems if any software could convince my router to open up any ports it felt like.
Yeah, there might be (a lot) people who don't even know that they have a problem that they can fix, but there really is no ideal solution. What they do is a compromize, they don't want to have to pay several million more in bandwidth fees a month (which would inevitably be passed on), so they set up a method that works reasonably well for most people.
Also, if you do know there is a problem, do follow their link, and do read the instructions, turning on port forwarding is hardly a hideously complex nightmare, even if you have no idea whatsoever what you are doing.
Your right that the world isn't quite that simple, but it is not true that you want the wheel spinning a few rad/s slower than it would need to be to remain in rolling contact. The reason is that the instant the wheel goes from rolling to sliding the braking at the brakes becomes irrelevant - locked, only just slower than rolling contact, or spinning in reverse, no traction is no traction. When this occurs, you have the stopping distance (almost) equal to dead weight sliding on rubber skids.
The reason ABS is a good thing is that it allows the brakes to do their job.
The same is true in reverse (acceleration). If you are drag racing on a frozen lake, it doesn't matter how many horses are under the hood, all that matters is how much power you can translate to forward motion. An Lada with tire studs will beat a Ferrari with racing slicks, because all that power means nothing if your wheels are spinning.
While you're right that ABS usually only modestly decreases stopping distance on most surfaces, saying that locked wheels stop faster than turning wheels flies in the face of basic physics. Recall from high school physics that there are 2 different coefficients of friction for any surface in contact, they are the static and dynamic coefficients of friction. The static coefficient is always higher. When the wheel is spinning you use the static coefficient, when it is sliding you use the dynamic. Stopping distance at speeds greater than ~10mph will always be shorter with a turning wheel than a locked wheel.
I'm sorry, but I really don't see how anyone is going to learn something from a non-interactive lecture on the internet that they couldn't learn from a book in a library.
Anything that can be said in a lecture can be written in a book. Anything that can be drawn on the board or presented on an overhead projector can be presented in a book.
Education doesn't come from sitting for lectures. At best the lectures provide the very most basic information to start the learning process. The real learning happens from interaction, assignments, and studying for tests. The value of a university isn't the lectures, it's the resources available to someone when they don't understand something they're studying. Whether that's classmates learning the same things at the same time, or expert professors and grad students (TAs) available through recitations or office hours, it's not recorded lectures and textbooks.
That's idiocy. Any waivers are contracts which can be broken by either party at any time. If someone signs your waver, enters your house, and finds themselves in an uncomfortable position they can revoke their consent. If they're not consenting, you're in big trouble. Hence the use of safe words in S&M situations.
If they do revoke their consent, you can ask them to leave, and call the police if they refuse, but you can't say too bad, you signed away your rights, I'm going to do as I please.
Good call AC, I stand corrected, scrubbers, in fact aren't particularly effective at removing mercury. Your post prompted me to look it up. This source indicates that the combination of bag houses, electrostatic precipitators, scrubbers, and catalitic reducers remove ~36% of the mercury contained in coal. That IMHO is an abysmally low number.
Slashdot Mirror
I believe the GP is referring to the Epistles, which (a) do make up the bulk of the NT, and (b) don't involve events, but rather mostly describe how members of the early Christian community were to live.
There is a legitimate argument to be made that Christianity isn't Christ's religion, but rather Paul's. Paul certainly spread his influence by sending letters to the far reaches of the empire.
Which is why I'm starting a campaign against entropy.
Please buy a souvenir here. All proceeds go to fighting entropy. For as little as a dollar a day, you to can help prevent thermal death
One example: emphasis mine
Now I don't know anything about the database Hemo uses to do his job, but you most certainly can be convicted of minor infractions. Whether a traffic violation, jaywalking, or littering is a criminal offense apparently varies by jurisdiction
But according to hemo, So, it would appear that depending on where you live, and how they handle minor infractions, there is a good chance that any littering convictions that you carry might be visible to any border guard in any country you ever travel to.
Notice the phrase Hemo uses is conviction, not arrest. You can be convicted of speeding, jaywalking, and littering, without ever having been arrested.
IMO, the people maintaining this list should be making a case by case judgment after the conviction whether or not the accused was a violent offender. In this case, the weatherman would be a yes, and non-violent protesters would be a no. Even if they were both charged and convicted of trespass.
Sadly, following orders appears to be human nature
Now this might spoil the ending, but the closest you're going to get isand
True, the spanish flu killed more people than any particular small pox outbreak and possibly more than even the black death, but as a percentage of the population both were far deadlier. Sure some specific populations were more affected by one or the other, but there were instances of 100% mortality from small pox as well, fertile flood plains along the mississippi were conspicuously empty when european explorers finally made it that far inland, because their germs preceded them.
Spanish flu - 2-20% population killed in most affected areas (damn near everywhere)
Black death - 30-60% population killed in most affected areas (eurasia)
Small pox - 70-95% population of affected area killed (americas)
My entry, the mechanical turck is a shoo in to win it all.
Well only if you don't count the black death, which killed 30-60% of the population of Europe, or the Small Pox pandemic which possibly killed upwards of 70% of Native Americans and advanced faster and was more ruthless than the conquering European armies.
Isn't Manhattan, being an island, above sea level? Remember the hysteria that broke when some would be (incompetent) terrorists were caught plotting to blow up the Lincoln Tunnel in order to flood Manhattan? After about 2 days of panic some one finally got on the news and told everyone it couldn't possibly happen, as water tends to not run uphill.
I'm pretty sure volatile is code for, "blah blah blah experts blah blah science." Isn't that all Joe Public should need to accept something that at is least counter-intuitive, and at worst physically impossible, all because Uncle Sam says so.
So yes, volatile can mean something other than will explode immediately, but no other meanings make their statement make any sense either
The thing is lighters are permitted to be carried on. You can also bring full sized bottles of liquor (up to 5 I believe) aboard a plane, provided you bought it at a duty free shop.
Yeah, but why would a substance with a high vapor pressure be a problem to a would be terrorist? Either the vapor pressure is so high that you literally could not combine small containers without most of it evaporating, in which case all your containers are going to have to be thick walled pressure vessels to begin with in order to contain it. I'm not one to put too much faith in the TSA myself, but even I would think that they'd notice a 1Q plastic zip-lock bag with seven 3oz. high pressure containers. The other possibility is that the fumes are highly noxious, and any attempted mixing would knock out or kill anyone opening the containers. Unless it is an immediate effect, I don't think a terrorist with a mind for taking down a plane is going to care that he is going to die from being poisoned in a few hours. If it could immediately incapacitate someone - to the point they couldn't assemble a bomb, then you don't need a bomb, you just need to open the container near the cockpit door, and wait for the plane to drop out of the sky.
This is a gem
So imagine, a terrorist is on a plane with seven three once bottles, and is prepared to blow up both the plane and himself. Fortunately, he wouldn't dare try to combine the liquids into a large container, because the chemicals are extremely volatile, and there might be some sort of explosion...
See that's a common misconception. Actually Bach pioneered the micropayment financial system when he used Germany's ubiquitous surveillance to monitor and debit 5 pfennig from the bank account anyone caught humming any portion of "Christ lag in Todesbanden"
The other important class of invention where this does not apply is where the inventor (or an operator under a NDA) is the only one using the invention. This could be basically every piece of industrial equipment ever invented. The shirt isn't a secret, but the loom is.
One of the nuances of the free market that really bit the airlines (and the auto industry) in the ass is that businesses require employees, and employees demand benefits. As your employees retire, you cease to benefit from them, but they continue to cost you money. Since a new airline doesn't have that kind of overhead, they can undercut you on price, and the cold free market would dictates that those established companies go belly-up, and leave their pensioners SOL.
Sure, maybe the new businesses have better structured pension plans, that aren't going to force them into bankruptcy in fifty years, and the "market" wins, but all those senior citizens with suddenly zero income sure is a lot of unpleasant collateral damage.
Protecting pensions is a big part of the reason that the government bailed out united and gm.
And yes, 401k's are great - at least mostly and thusfar, but they didn't exist in 1950.
Cutting taxes across the board are sometimes good for economics. If the state of Michigan cut taxes across the board (instead of raising the sales tax) the government still would not be functioning. A nonfunctioning government is decidedly bad for the economy. Cutting government spending can be good for the economy, of course if the department of the treasury cut spending on the Secret Service unit that pursues counterfeiters, it is very possible that there would be an influx of counterfeit money. Counterfeit money is generally a negative for the economy.
You, my libertarian (anarchist?) friend seem to be under the misguided notion that less government is always better government. In reality, where we need police, roads, schools, and corporate, health, and banking regulators, and even (gasp) an army, some government actions are actually good things. The trick is to tax and spend at the right amount. I'm not convinced that the right tax burden is less than what it currently is, nor am I convinced that we shouldn't be spending more government (taxpayer) money on projects like universal healthcare. What I am convinced of is that a large portion of the money that the government spends is spent unwisely. Of course, if we could all agree on which dollars are the unwise ones, we wouldn't be in this mess to start with.
In other words, the solution isn't as simple as what you suggest, and even if it were, you couldn't convince enough people that you're right to do something about it.
Alright, I'm not a networking guy by any means, but how exactly is WoW supposed to open up ports on my router? I'm not even going to pretend to understand why they can't use ports that don't need to be explicitly forwarded, but I'd have major problems if any software could convince my router to open up any ports it felt like.
Yeah, there might be (a lot) people who don't even know that they have a problem that they can fix, but there really is no ideal solution. What they do is a compromize, they don't want to have to pay several million more in bandwidth fees a month (which would inevitably be passed on), so they set up a method that works reasonably well for most people.
Also, if you do know there is a problem, do follow their link, and do read the instructions, turning on port forwarding is hardly a hideously complex nightmare, even if you have no idea whatsoever what you are doing.
Your right that the world isn't quite that simple, but it is not true that you want the wheel spinning a few rad/s slower than it would need to be to remain in rolling contact. The reason is that the instant the wheel goes from rolling to sliding the braking at the brakes becomes irrelevant - locked, only just slower than rolling contact, or spinning in reverse, no traction is no traction. When this occurs, you have the stopping distance (almost) equal to dead weight sliding on rubber skids.
The reason ABS is a good thing is that it allows the brakes to do their job.
The same is true in reverse (acceleration). If you are drag racing on a frozen lake, it doesn't matter how many horses are under the hood, all that matters is how much power you can translate to forward motion. An Lada with tire studs will beat a Ferrari with racing slicks, because all that power means nothing if your wheels are spinning.
Please link to your studies.
While you're right that ABS usually only modestly decreases stopping distance on most surfaces, saying that locked wheels stop faster than turning wheels flies in the face of basic physics. Recall from high school physics that there are 2 different coefficients of friction for any surface in contact, they are the static and dynamic coefficients of friction. The static coefficient is always higher. When the wheel is spinning you use the static coefficient, when it is sliding you use the dynamic. Stopping distance at speeds greater than ~10mph will always be shorter with a turning wheel than a locked wheel.
I'm sorry, but I really don't see how anyone is going to learn something from a non-interactive lecture on the internet that they couldn't learn from a book in a library.
Anything that can be said in a lecture can be written in a book. Anything that can be drawn on the board or presented on an overhead projector can be presented in a book.
Education doesn't come from sitting for lectures. At best the lectures provide the very most basic information to start the learning process. The real learning happens from interaction, assignments, and studying for tests. The value of a university isn't the lectures, it's the resources available to someone when they don't understand something they're studying. Whether that's classmates learning the same things at the same time, or expert professors and grad students (TAs) available through recitations or office hours, it's not recorded lectures and textbooks.
Wait, so you read slashdot for the stories!?
Man things really have changed.
That's idiocy. Any waivers are contracts which can be broken by either party at any time. If someone signs your waver, enters your house, and finds themselves in an uncomfortable position they can revoke their consent. If they're not consenting, you're in big trouble. Hence the use of safe words in S&M situations.
If they do revoke their consent, you can ask them to leave, and call the police if they refuse, but you can't say too bad, you signed away your rights, I'm going to do as I please.
Good call AC, I stand corrected, scrubbers, in fact aren't particularly effective at removing mercury. Your post prompted me to look it up. This source indicates that the combination of bag houses, electrostatic precipitators, scrubbers, and catalitic reducers remove ~36% of the mercury contained in coal. That IMHO is an abysmally low number.