Also "inexpensive generator" do you mean one that can run AC?
No, an "inexpensive generator" is for necessities. For 99% of people out there, air conditioning is not a necessity. If you lose power for a few days, it is for most people a prolonged inconvenience, not the f$&king apocalypse. You adapt and live without your precious air conditioning for a few hours or days, like humanity has for all but the last century, and like 3/4 of the planet today.
What in 's name are you doing with an electric furnace for your house...in Canada? Was there ever a time in the last fifty years when such a thing was economical?
How could they? Everyone knows that Welsh is a made-up language, right up there with Sindarin and Klingon. No one actually speaks it, they just string some good sounding syllables together when they need it. Welsh has the added burden of actually being a cryptographic cypher, allowing plaintext to be transcribed into an unbreakable code.
But now I would like to see Romney win the presidency & appoint some limited-government constitutionists to the Court
What, like Chief Justice John Roberts? The guy who provided the deciding vote in this case and wrote the majority opinion? The one appointed by G.W., who has in most other cases has sided with Scalia, Alito, and Thomas?
Uggghhh, the linked article only has some lame text, written in some script I can't decypher, in a language I cannot understand. Scholarship is too hard!
That price is for the 6 Mbps service. Considering that real-world performance never actually matches that, that service level will be suitable for web surfing and downloads, but probably inadequate for video streaming (e.g., Netflix). More likely you are in the 20 Mbps tier.
The OP was asking what power congress has to CREATE the ADA, not what does the ADA do.
There's nowhere in the constitution that gives congress the power to regulate how private businesses operate. Some would say (not saying I do) that we should let economics figure this out. if there's money to be made, then companies will make it happen.
It largely falls under the Commerce Clause, which a bunch of people have already pointed out.
More generally, it falls from the spirit and intent of the Constitution, which is to establish a government of, by, and particularly for the people. The Constitution is not solely about enumerating powers and rights to keep the government from trampling everything: it is a framework that encourages us, through government, to be beholden to one another. If you are looking for a constitutional justification for the ADA, one need look no further than the Preamble - that part about "We the People...establish Justice,..., promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty...." If you are wheelchair-bound and can't get up a flight of stairs to a courtroom, or even your corner grocery, then "We the People" have failed our obligations to one another.
As to "companies will make it happen," I would urge you to have a look at how things were before the ADA was enacted. It is not like physical handicaps are a recent phenomenon, and yet look at how many accommodations business made to them before the ADA was enacted. All it takes is one unlucky accident and you could find yourself on the flip side of it. And for that reason, society has an obligation to support and make accommodations for the disabled. Some would say it is merely a moral obligation, not a legal one. But although businesses are a part of society, they are not bound by moral obligations. Therefore, our country has decided to make it a legal obligation, too.
OEMs have, with few exceptions, done a pretty dismal job of creating Windows-based mobile hardware, and utterly abysmal at producing competitors to the iPad. Is it any wonder MS said to itself "these guys can't deliver, let's do it ourselves"?
Although humans are called the "rational animal," I think it is, at best, only correct to call us an animal capable of reason. Logical reasoning isn't necessarily innate: it's something that takes teaching and practice. And even then, as we all know, people who are otherwise very good at reasoning things out can be downright dimwitted about applying that logic to other situations.
Indeed. You could probably harvest as much energy from the temperature difference between the skin and air, or from the quivering of the leg muscles themselves, or even from the static charge you pick up while walking on carpet!
Tablets, computers, etc., all can be machine-assembled, or assembled by half-way trained manual laborers in a factories that can achieve high throughput by economies of scale, division of labor, etc. And although they are densely packed, personal electronics are still, for the most part, macroscopic. The components in a hearing aid, by contract, have many miniscule components that are assembled very carefully, by hand, by skilled laborers using loupes and microscopes - more akin to watchmaking than assembly-lines. As such, the assembly labor has resisted outsourcing. Plus, the number of units being assembled by any one company (there are many players in the market) aren't large enough to support well-oiled assembly lines running 24-7. Finally, most hearing aids have some amount of customization to each patient (ear-insert moldings for some models, equalization tuning for others), which further increases cost.
Others have mentioned the addition cost associated with it being a medical device, which is not insignificant. Lastly, because many hearing aids are paid for by insurance, rather than out-of-pocket, there is less consumer-driven pressure to reduce costs.
children don't often buy toasters, at least not with their own money, solely so that they can tear them down. There's no need: they can inherit endless cast-off appliances for free.
I really enjoyed my 3rd-gen iPod. That 10 GB sucker kept me in good listening mode for about five years. Eventually, the hard drive crapped out. I still have it, though it is difficult to see how much use it would be unless I replaced the hard drive and battery - assuming I could even find replacement parts. It's particularly difficult to see how useful it would be, when my wife has a (still functioning) 120-GB iPod that is thinner, lighter, longer-playing, more capacious, and has a color screen and video-out capability.
"No person shall be... deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law". Note the wording - it doesn't state that the government must actually have seized the property in question (which the government argues they did not do) - it must merely have caused a person to be deprived of their property. By their own logic, through the actions of the government, Mr. Goodwin has been deprived of his property, and without his right to a jury trial.
Don't equate "due process of law" with a jury trial. A jury trial is an example of due process, but it's not the only one. There are all manner of legal processes through which you can lose, have taken away, be temporarily deprived of, or otherwise forfeit property without going through a jury trial. As a most simple example: property gets seized as part of a search warrant all the time, as has happened in this case. Sometimes it is eventually returned, sometimes it is permanently retained as evidence. None of that requires a jury trial, even though it's often involved.
Lovely strawman arguments you throw out there. But you are neglecting the cost-benefit analysis that would need to accompany such a policy. Driving, for better or worse, is an essential element of our economy and sense of freedom; it provides an overwhelming good compared to its costs (like the fact that it can kill you). Running is far more beneficial to you than the potential joint problems - a cost that largely effects you and isn't a tremendous cost to society at large.
I think you'd have a hard time making the case that HFCS-laden sodas have more benefits than costs. What potential good do they serve that could outweight the staggering societal costs in terms of poor nutrition, rising obesity, idiotic agricultural policy. What is wrong with taxing things that are bad for you and society? You discourage the activity/behavior, and generate a revenue stream to combat the harm it causes. For the conservatives and libertarians, this is a much better course than outright banning sodas. Consumers still have a choice; they just have a better accounting of that choice.
I really don't care if this helps kids for five minutes, because ten minutes from now they'll switch to cheap artificially sweetened drinks that are cancerous
Public health is all about relative risk. If the population-level harm caused by mass consumption of sugary drinks is far, far outweighed by the (speculative and unproven) risk of added cancers in that same population. (This is why policies more-or-less mandating vaccination are good: the risk to a population (even relative risk for individuals) of vaccine-related complications is drastically lower than the risk of the diseases the vaccines combat. "We don't need to talk about that though, just the facts, ma'am.")
Who knows, maybe people won't substitute HFCS-sweetened drinks for "diet" versions of the same 1:1. Maybe it'll be lower than that, and maybe some will just give it up altogether. In the meantime, the policy influences (not mandates) consumer decisions in a favorable way.
Sure, if you have some unknown password, and your brute strength computer can get a yes/no answer to each guess just as quickly as the guesses can be generated, then most passwords are shockingly insecure and can be cracked in fractions of a second. However, in many real-world situations, each guess has some minimum time or cost associated with it, which severely limits the real-world speed of a brute strength attack. For instance, if you are trying to guess the password to a WiFi network, each attempted connection takes several milliseconds at least, and multiple guesses can't happen simultaneously. What is more, there are also a large number of password-protected scenarios where too many failed attempts, or attempts that come in too-quick succession, result in being locked out.
So, yeah, a 6-character password may be crackable in 0.0000224 seconds - in an ideal, offline case backed by serious computing power. That might be the case of, say, the NSA trying to decrypt a copy of your hard-drive. In many real-world cases, these numbers are pretty meaningless except as relative measures of strength. But there have been good analytical tools for that since the days of Claude Shannon.
I'm with you. A NASA webcast is the closest I'm likely to get to this event: we've had impenetrable cloud cover for nearly a week, and this evening is not likely to clear up.
As far as the optics go, the main criteria in both applications is primary mirror diameter and focal length. The application-specific stuff is further downstream in the objective optics and camera (resolution, sensitivity (both what wavelengths it is sensitive to, and the effective ISO value)). From what I gather, these cast-off telescopes have a primary mirror similar to hubble's, which results in good light gathering for both applications. They also have a shorter focal length than Hubble. That makes sense for reconnaissance, because what you are looking at is so much closer, as compared to Hubble, where you are trying to resolve things billions of light-years away. However, for dark-energy astronomy, I gather a wider field of view would be preferred, so it's serendipitous.
Bear in mind though: these aren't complete, launch-ready satellites. You've got the major components of a telescope, but you are likely lacking the actual camera, plus most of the rest of the satellite components (solar panels, flight computer, thrusters and gyros, batteries, thermal management, etc.). Still, it gets you a lot closer than designing from scratch. Plus, by having certain components fixed from the get-go forces a lot of the rest of the design into place, rather than spending years trying to get past the blank page of infinite possibilities.
You could also interface with the building, for example doing CCTV recordings and controlling HVAC (maybe even remotely?), but that's a whole different can of worms.
As a matter of pragmatic security, don't run the building CCTV and HVAC controls through the same network as the units' internet connection. Last thing the building management needs is some 13-year old whiz playing with the thermostats! If you have opportunities to, for instance, get all the wiring runs done at the same time, great, but keep the networks strictly segregated.
The statement "The Falcon Heavy has more than twice the power of the next largest rocket in the world" is true but somewhat misleading. Both the USA and Russia have had rockets in the past with more than twice the power that the "Falcon Heavy" will.
A Saturn V sitting on the lawn of Johnson Space Center doesn't count, neither do Shuttle orbiters on display at various museums.
You could probably do very well with measurements of the sun's and/or Earth's location above the (lunar) horizon, combined with a very accurate clock. That is, after all, how latitude (and, to a lesser extent, longitude) were measured out on the open sea for centuries.
Slashdot Mirror
No, an "inexpensive generator" is for necessities. For 99% of people out there, air conditioning is not a necessity. If you lose power for a few days, it is for most people a prolonged inconvenience, not the f$&king apocalypse. You adapt and live without your precious air conditioning for a few hours or days, like humanity has for all but the last century, and like 3/4 of the planet today.
What in 's name are you doing with an electric furnace for your house...in Canada? Was there ever a time in the last fifty years when such a thing was economical?
How could they? Everyone knows that Welsh is a made-up language, right up there with Sindarin and Klingon. No one actually speaks it, they just string some good sounding syllables together when they need it. Welsh has the added burden of actually being a cryptographic cypher, allowing plaintext to be transcribed into an unbreakable code.
Wow, this is a total shock. I mean, when Jimmy Fucking Wales got involved, I was sure the government was going to drop everything!
What, like Chief Justice John Roberts? The guy who provided the deciding vote in this case and wrote the majority opinion? The one appointed by G.W., who has in most other cases has sided with Scalia, Alito, and Thomas?
Uggghhh, the linked article only has some lame text, written in some script I can't decypher, in a language I cannot understand. Scholarship is too hard!
Pics or it didn't happen.
[tongue in cheek]
That price is for the 6 Mbps service. Considering that real-world performance never actually matches that, that service level will be suitable for web surfing and downloads, but probably inadequate for video streaming (e.g., Netflix). More likely you are in the 20 Mbps tier.
It largely falls under the Commerce Clause, which a bunch of people have already pointed out.
..., promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty...." If you are wheelchair-bound and can't get up a flight of stairs to a courtroom, or even your corner grocery, then "We the People" have failed our obligations to one another.
More generally, it falls from the spirit and intent of the Constitution, which is to establish a government of, by, and particularly for the people. The Constitution is not solely about enumerating powers and rights to keep the government from trampling everything: it is a framework that encourages us, through government, to be beholden to one another. If you are looking for a constitutional justification for the ADA, one need look no further than the Preamble - that part about "We the People...establish Justice,
As to "companies will make it happen," I would urge you to have a look at how things were before the ADA was enacted. It is not like physical handicaps are a recent phenomenon, and yet look at how many accommodations business made to them before the ADA was enacted. All it takes is one unlucky accident and you could find yourself on the flip side of it. And for that reason, society has an obligation to support and make accommodations for the disabled. Some would say it is merely a moral obligation, not a legal one. But although businesses are a part of society, they are not bound by moral obligations. Therefore, our country has decided to make it a legal obligation, too.
OEMs have, with few exceptions, done a pretty dismal job of creating Windows-based mobile hardware, and utterly abysmal at producing competitors to the iPad. Is it any wonder MS said to itself "these guys can't deliver, let's do it ourselves"?
Although humans are called the "rational animal," I think it is, at best, only correct to call us an animal capable of reason. Logical reasoning isn't necessarily innate: it's something that takes teaching and practice. And even then, as we all know, people who are otherwise very good at reasoning things out can be downright dimwitted about applying that logic to other situations.
Correction: power, not energy.
Indeed. You could probably harvest as much energy from the temperature difference between the skin and air, or from the quivering of the leg muscles themselves, or even from the static charge you pick up while walking on carpet!
Tablets, computers, etc., all can be machine-assembled, or assembled by half-way trained manual laborers in a factories that can achieve high throughput by economies of scale, division of labor, etc. And although they are densely packed, personal electronics are still, for the most part, macroscopic. The components in a hearing aid, by contract, have many miniscule components that are assembled very carefully, by hand, by skilled laborers using loupes and microscopes - more akin to watchmaking than assembly-lines. As such, the assembly labor has resisted outsourcing. Plus, the number of units being assembled by any one company (there are many players in the market) aren't large enough to support well-oiled assembly lines running 24-7. Finally, most hearing aids have some amount of customization to each patient (ear-insert moldings for some models, equalization tuning for others), which further increases cost.
Others have mentioned the addition cost associated with it being a medical device, which is not insignificant. Lastly, because many hearing aids are paid for by insurance, rather than out-of-pocket, there is less consumer-driven pressure to reduce costs.
children don't often buy toasters, at least not with their own money, solely so that they can tear them down. There's no need: they can inherit endless cast-off appliances for free.
I really enjoyed my 3rd-gen iPod. That 10 GB sucker kept me in good listening mode for about five years. Eventually, the hard drive crapped out. I still have it, though it is difficult to see how much use it would be unless I replaced the hard drive and battery - assuming I could even find replacement parts. It's particularly difficult to see how useful it would be, when my wife has a (still functioning) 120-GB iPod that is thinner, lighter, longer-playing, more capacious, and has a color screen and video-out capability.
Don't equate "due process of law" with a jury trial. A jury trial is an example of due process, but it's not the only one. There are all manner of legal processes through which you can lose, have taken away, be temporarily deprived of, or otherwise forfeit property without going through a jury trial. As a most simple example: property gets seized as part of a search warrant all the time, as has happened in this case. Sometimes it is eventually returned, sometimes it is permanently retained as evidence. None of that requires a jury trial, even though it's often involved.
Wait a sec, I know that movie. It sucked.
Lovely strawman arguments you throw out there. But you are neglecting the cost-benefit analysis that would need to accompany such a policy. Driving, for better or worse, is an essential element of our economy and sense of freedom; it provides an overwhelming good compared to its costs (like the fact that it can kill you). Running is far more beneficial to you than the potential joint problems - a cost that largely effects you and isn't a tremendous cost to society at large.
I think you'd have a hard time making the case that HFCS-laden sodas have more benefits than costs. What potential good do they serve that could outweight the staggering societal costs in terms of poor nutrition, rising obesity, idiotic agricultural policy. What is wrong with taxing things that are bad for you and society? You discourage the activity/behavior, and generate a revenue stream to combat the harm it causes. For the conservatives and libertarians, this is a much better course than outright banning sodas. Consumers still have a choice; they just have a better accounting of that choice.
Public health is all about relative risk. If the population-level harm caused by mass consumption of sugary drinks is far, far outweighed by the (speculative and unproven) risk of added cancers in that same population. (This is why policies more-or-less mandating vaccination are good: the risk to a population (even relative risk for individuals) of vaccine-related complications is drastically lower than the risk of the diseases the vaccines combat. "We don't need to talk about that though, just the facts, ma'am.")
Who knows, maybe people won't substitute HFCS-sweetened drinks for "diet" versions of the same 1:1. Maybe it'll be lower than that, and maybe some will just give it up altogether. In the meantime, the policy influences (not mandates) consumer decisions in a favorable way.
Sure, if you have some unknown password, and your brute strength computer can get a yes/no answer to each guess just as quickly as the guesses can be generated, then most passwords are shockingly insecure and can be cracked in fractions of a second. However, in many real-world situations, each guess has some minimum time or cost associated with it, which severely limits the real-world speed of a brute strength attack. For instance, if you are trying to guess the password to a WiFi network, each attempted connection takes several milliseconds at least, and multiple guesses can't happen simultaneously. What is more, there are also a large number of password-protected scenarios where too many failed attempts, or attempts that come in too-quick succession, result in being locked out.
So, yeah, a 6-character password may be crackable in 0.0000224 seconds - in an ideal, offline case backed by serious computing power. That might be the case of, say, the NSA trying to decrypt a copy of your hard-drive. In many real-world cases, these numbers are pretty meaningless except as relative measures of strength. But there have been good analytical tools for that since the days of Claude Shannon.
I'm with you. A NASA webcast is the closest I'm likely to get to this event: we've had impenetrable cloud cover for nearly a week, and this evening is not likely to clear up.
As far as the optics go, the main criteria in both applications is primary mirror diameter and focal length. The application-specific stuff is further downstream in the objective optics and camera (resolution, sensitivity (both what wavelengths it is sensitive to, and the effective ISO value)). From what I gather, these cast-off telescopes have a primary mirror similar to hubble's, which results in good light gathering for both applications. They also have a shorter focal length than Hubble. That makes sense for reconnaissance, because what you are looking at is so much closer, as compared to Hubble, where you are trying to resolve things billions of light-years away. However, for dark-energy astronomy, I gather a wider field of view would be preferred, so it's serendipitous.
Bear in mind though: these aren't complete, launch-ready satellites. You've got the major components of a telescope, but you are likely lacking the actual camera, plus most of the rest of the satellite components (solar panels, flight computer, thrusters and gyros, batteries, thermal management, etc.). Still, it gets you a lot closer than designing from scratch. Plus, by having certain components fixed from the get-go forces a lot of the rest of the design into place, rather than spending years trying to get past the blank page of infinite possibilities.
As a matter of pragmatic security, don't run the building CCTV and HVAC controls through the same network as the units' internet connection. Last thing the building management needs is some 13-year old whiz playing with the thermostats! If you have opportunities to, for instance, get all the wiring runs done at the same time, great, but keep the networks strictly segregated.
A Saturn V sitting on the lawn of Johnson Space Center doesn't count, neither do Shuttle orbiters on display at various museums.
You could probably do very well with measurements of the sun's and/or Earth's location above the (lunar) horizon, combined with a very accurate clock. That is, after all, how latitude (and, to a lesser extent, longitude) were measured out on the open sea for centuries.