As others have pointed out, the fuel losses are about negligible. The main problem comes with mechanical wear on the starter motor, flywheel, and other parts.
If you're sitting at a red light, it's generally not worth shutting the car off. But if you're stuck at a train crossing for 5-10 minutes (or more, sometimes), then yes, shut the car off.
And when that bearing starts to wear out, it makes an awful squeaking noise. The only way to make it stop is to put a tiny bit of pressure on the clutch, to take up the slack in the system. And that accelerates the problem, so you live with the squeaking.
Moral of story? Don't by fourth-hand cars from shady places.
Well, from a more practical standpoint, representing yourself is inadvisable because of emotional involvement. You're the one on trial, and regardless of whether you're guilty or not, you're going to be nervous, probably scared, and almost certainly unable to think clearly. That's a bad thing when you're trying to poke holes in the opposition's argument. You also don't have ready access to case law (or at least the ready knowledge of where to start).
By contrast, a lawyer is detached from the situation. He most likely won't get nervous questioning a witness and won't be prone to emotional outbursts (or accidental slips) during a trial.
It's basically the same reasons why doctors shouldn't self-medicate... you generally aren't going to be capable of proper judgment.
I'd love to live and see at least the beginning of terraformation of Mars but I don't see it happening without a business plan.
I'd love to see Mars terraformed, too... but that will never happen under private industry. It's too long-term for the private sector, which isn't interested if they don't get a return in two years maximum. Hell, [i]next[/i] year is too far out for many corporations.
Fifteen minutes to start up?! What the heck are you running on there?
We can cold-boot into XP with novell, start Notes, Catia, Enovia, and everything else in less than five. Ten after a power outage and the server connection needs to be reestablished.
The engineers in this example would have the advantage of being able to modify other parts of the car, rearrange or eliminate unneeded structure, etc. Yes, you pay for it somehow (labor and maybe materials), but generally a car/plane/boat with a given feature designed into it from the start will be somewhat more efficient/lighter/capable than one where that feature has been retrofitted. It might even be a cost savings after all, since the OEM has access to all of the engineering data instead of having to reverse-engineer it like a third party would have to.
Example: The current generation of 737s can be fitted with winglets (small vertical surfaces on the wingtips) to improve fuel efficiency. Doing so requires that the wing structure be beefed-up a bit (relative to a non-equipped wing) to handle the additional loads.
At first, the aircraft didn't come with the necessary stiffening, so anyone that wanted to fit the winglets also had to add structural rienforcement to the outer wing (extra plates and doublers riveted and bolted on). Later on in the production cycle, the wing structure was modified to have the required stiffening from the beginning (by just thickening certain parts, for example).
The end result was that, once fitted with a winglet, the later-production wings were lighter than the early ones. The difference isn't huge, but in aviation (where weight is everything) it adds up.
I'm fairly libertarian, but I'm willing to accept the concept of universal healthcare. However, the idea of government-controlled healthcare frightens me. I don't want some government desk jockey denying a procedure by fiat and leave me unable to do anything about it.
Of course, private insurance hardly any better. Insurance should cover the big items--accidents, major illnesses, etc. I'm convinced healthcare costs are so high primarily because of insurance. As more and more people got insurance that covered routine stuff, the medical types realized "hey, we can raise the prices and people will still come, because they only see the copay. The insurance companies will just pick up the rest!" I mean, how many times have you heard people talk about getting pills for "free" or "only a couple dollars"? It's just like taxes--"I didn't pay any taxes this year; they actually gave me money!" Yeah right... Then there's the problem of people demanding antibiotics for everything, an over-litigous society, and emergency-room visits for earaches...
Tax-funded healthcare is one thing. But I'm tired of seeing welfare for nothing. You shouldn't be drawing from the public coffers (supplied by money taken by force on your behalf) just for breathing. If you want a welfare program, make those receiving benefits contribute in some way. The able-bodied can build stuff (public works, roads, mass transit, etc). The disabled can do other things.
Get off my lawn, back in my day, uphill both ways, blah blah blah...
I'm pretty sure spin training is an exception to the parachute requirement (chutes required for bank > 60 deg, or pitch > 30, if more than one person on board).
Personally, I don't bother with a parachute; it wouldn't do me any good as I wouldn't be able to get out in the first place.
There is no header picture in Notes e-mail. There is a field in notes that points to an image in your mail file. It is something in the form of "header_picture=5". The notes client then locates the image corresponding with this number 5 and displays an image. The header image works only on an internal lotus network and external e-mail will not have an extra jpeg attached to dispay the header. This has been the case since I used notes (version 4)
Didn't know that... but still, it's annoying and dumb-looking.
Lotus notes may have a great database or whatever, and some nice features like integrated calendars and meeting notes... but the interface sucks donkey nuts. Rotten, maggoty, herpes-infected donkey nuts.
Keyboard shortcuts and terminology are completely different from every other program out there. I mean, F5 is the standard refresh key in Windows and every other program I've used... but in Notes, F5 is the "lock interface" key. F9 refreshes. And selecting multiple items with control or shift doesn't work; you need to use the little check column. WTF, IBM?
Instead of all the options being in one place, different options and configuration screens are accessed through completely different menus, with no logic as to which option is available in which menu. WTF, IBM?
Notes insists on putting that stupid email header with a picture and scroll boxes on every fracking email. I guess it's designed to look like stationery, or like a formal memo. But that fancy header takes 800 bytes. And when you replicate that over a chain of emails with quoted history, it starts taking up a good bit of space. WTF, IBM?
And speaking of quoting emails... trimming quoted emails is a major pain in the ass. Say you want to trim the ten quoted emails down to two, because your idiot coworkers don't... if you accidentally move the mouse just a little bit, and highlight beyond the magical invisible point in the quoted text, it selects all of the quoted material, and there's no way to back up other than starting over. WTF, IBM?
There's no way to just delete the attachment on emails in your inbox, so they sit there cluttering up space. I know you can download the attachment, but you can't save the email in with the rest of them. I want to be able to delete the attachment and keep the email in my inbox. And please delete the attachment automatically with replies... I'm tired of seeing the 3mb file I emailed out turning up in every one of the seven replies. Is that too much to ask?
Often when the "how much did that cost?" question is asked, they're thinking "how much of my money did that cost?", with their money being in the form of taxes.
You're thinking of making a big tower (like a really large skyscraper). That wouldn't work. You have to approach the problem differently.
A simplified explanation of a space elevator is to take a really long, really strong cable (nanotubes), hang a weight on the end (more cable, an asteroid, lots of metal, etc), and anchor it on the equator. The weight goes out beyond geostationary orbit, and the tension of your cable pulls in on the counterweight to keep it from flying away. The tension keeps your cable taut. You can then run "cars" or "trains" up and down the cable on motorized wheels, most likely with electric power (solar, beamed microwave, or conducted through the cable). Your car can travel nice and slow, and be more efficient than a rocket.
If this doesn't make sense, imagine tying a weight to the end of a string, holding on to the other end, and spinning in circles. The weight will be held out at the end of the string and appear stationary relative to (since you're spinning too). Now put a caterpillar on that string that walks to the counterweight and back to you.
In short, the advantage is that you can use electrical power (which you don't have to carry with you) converted to direct mechanical energy to climb into orbit, instead of expelling fuel (less efficient) that you do have to carry with you. Your vehicle ("car") structure is simpler, more robust, and cheaper than a rocket. The elevator itself would be quite expensive, and requires some advances in materials science, but isn't physically impossible.
No. Guns are designed to stop people. That makes them excellent tools for self-defense, as the object of self-defense is to stop someone who is attacking you...
Knives are designed for cutting things. Those things may be human flesh, or may be carrots or cardboard. A knife can be a decent tool for self-defense, but requires you to let the attacker get close - a definite disadvantage as compared to a gun.
To add... the advantage of the gun for lawful self-defense is that it is usable by everyone. A knife requires its user to have at least some physical strength and speed, since you're fighting in close to someone and the weapon requires direct manual input of force. Clubs, sticks, bats, etc. are similar. The gun only requires that you be strong enough to point it and shoot. It lets the elderly man defend himself against a group of young thugs; it lets the old grandmother defend her house against the teenager that broke in (funny story: one old lady held the guy at gunpoint and made him call the cops on himself), it lets the petite 95-pound woman defend herself against a 250lb would-be rapist.
If you're really concerned about gun violence, lets figure out why people do that to begin with, and attack the root cause. Better education and a justice system that intervenes with delinquents early on (instead of just giving slaps on the wrists until a serious crime is committed) would go a long way towards this.
Eliminating the EC might make everyone's vote "equal", but then we'll see candidates going to the major cities--LA, NYC, Chicago, Atlanta, Dallas, etc. A handful of isolated spots on the map will get all the attention, and everyone not in those cities gets told to fuck off, cause the city people know what's best for everyone.
Exactly. I'm tired of seeing the people in the "big cities" of various states thinking they know what's best for everyone and trying to set policy for the rest of the state. They want everyone to live just like they do in the city... which I'll pass on, thanks.
The problem is that so many software patents try to protect end results, rather than the specific process. "Tagging of digital photographs by insertion of data at $point in $process manner" might be patentable, if it's unconventional and non-obvious. "Tagging digital photographs with short text strings" is not patentable.
An analogy might be a patent on "converting stored chemical energy into rotary mechanical power by combustion", which would basically cover steam engines, turboshafts, internal combustion/diesel engines, etc. The patent tries to cover everything that gives you a desired result, rather than the specific process by which it is acutally done.
Slashdot Mirror
As others have pointed out, the fuel losses are about negligible. The main problem comes with mechanical wear on the starter motor, flywheel, and other parts.
If you're sitting at a red light, it's generally not worth shutting the car off. But if you're stuck at a train crossing for 5-10 minutes (or more, sometimes), then yes, shut the car off.
And when that bearing starts to wear out, it makes an awful squeaking noise. The only way to make it stop is to put a tiny bit of pressure on the clutch, to take up the slack in the system. And that accelerates the problem, so you live with the squeaking.
Moral of story? Don't by fourth-hand cars from shady places.
Well, from a more practical standpoint, representing yourself is inadvisable because of emotional involvement. You're the one on trial, and regardless of whether you're guilty or not, you're going to be nervous, probably scared, and almost certainly unable to think clearly. That's a bad thing when you're trying to poke holes in the opposition's argument. You also don't have ready access to case law (or at least the ready knowledge of where to start).
By contrast, a lawyer is detached from the situation. He most likely won't get nervous questioning a witness and won't be prone to emotional outbursts (or accidental slips) during a trial.
It's basically the same reasons why doctors shouldn't self-medicate... you generally aren't going to be capable of proper judgment.
I'd love to live and see at least the beginning of terraformation of Mars but I don't see it happening without a business plan.
I'd love to see Mars terraformed, too... but that will never happen under private industry. It's too long-term for the private sector, which isn't interested if they don't get a return in two years maximum. Hell, [i]next[/i] year is too far out for many corporations.
Fifteen minutes to start up?! What the heck are you running on there?
We can cold-boot into XP with novell, start Notes, Catia, Enovia, and everything else in less than five. Ten after a power outage and the server connection needs to be reestablished.
The engineers in this example would have the advantage of being able to modify other parts of the car, rearrange or eliminate unneeded structure, etc. Yes, you pay for it somehow (labor and maybe materials), but generally a car/plane/boat with a given feature designed into it from the start will be somewhat more efficient/lighter/capable than one where that feature has been retrofitted. It might even be a cost savings after all, since the OEM has access to all of the engineering data instead of having to reverse-engineer it like a third party would have to.
Example: The current generation of 737s can be fitted with winglets (small vertical surfaces on the wingtips) to improve fuel efficiency. Doing so requires that the wing structure be beefed-up a bit (relative to a non-equipped wing) to handle the additional loads.
At first, the aircraft didn't come with the necessary stiffening, so anyone that wanted to fit the winglets also had to add structural rienforcement to the outer wing (extra plates and doublers riveted and bolted on). Later on in the production cycle, the wing structure was modified to have the required stiffening from the beginning (by just thickening certain parts, for example).
The end result was that, once fitted with a winglet, the later-production wings were lighter than the early ones. The difference isn't huge, but in aviation (where weight is everything) it adds up.
Err, you can register to vote before you turn 18, so long as you register within 6 months of your birthday and you will be 18 by or on election day.
I know because I did it several years ago.
Though it might be included in those above, I would add "all parties have full access to the relevant and important information".
I'm fairly libertarian, but I'm willing to accept the concept of universal healthcare. However, the idea of government-controlled healthcare frightens me. I don't want some government desk jockey denying a procedure by fiat and leave me unable to do anything about it.
Of course, private insurance hardly any better. Insurance should cover the big items--accidents, major illnesses, etc. I'm convinced healthcare costs are so high primarily because of insurance. As more and more people got insurance that covered routine stuff, the medical types realized "hey, we can raise the prices and people will still come, because they only see the copay. The insurance companies will just pick up the rest!" I mean, how many times have you heard people talk about getting pills for "free" or "only a couple dollars"? It's just like taxes--"I didn't pay any taxes this year; they actually gave me money!" Yeah right... Then there's the problem of people demanding antibiotics for everything, an over-litigous society, and emergency-room visits for earaches...
Tax-funded healthcare is one thing. But I'm tired of seeing welfare for nothing. You shouldn't be drawing from the public coffers (supplied by money taken by force on your behalf) just for breathing. If you want a welfare program, make those receiving benefits contribute in some way. The able-bodied can build stuff (public works, roads, mass transit, etc). The disabled can do other things.
Get off my lawn, back in my day, uphill both ways, blah blah blah...
I'm pretty sure spin training is an exception to the parachute requirement (chutes required for bank > 60 deg, or pitch > 30, if more than one person on board).
Personally, I don't bother with a parachute; it wouldn't do me any good as I wouldn't be able to get out in the first place.
There is no header picture in Notes e-mail. There is a field in notes that points to an image in your mail file. It is something in the form of "header_picture=5". The notes client then locates the image corresponding with this number 5 and displays an image. The header image works only on an internal lotus network and external e-mail will not have an extra jpeg attached to dispay the header. This has been the case since I used notes (version 4)
Didn't know that... but still, it's annoying and dumb-looking.
the crock family
Country and pot?
How about "How is babby formed?"
I know it's off-subject, but where did that come from? I've seen it in a couple places lately...
Lotus notes may have a great database or whatever, and some nice features like integrated calendars and meeting notes... but the interface sucks donkey nuts. Rotten, maggoty, herpes-infected donkey nuts.
Keyboard shortcuts and terminology are completely different from every other program out there. I mean, F5 is the standard refresh key in Windows and every other program I've used... but in Notes, F5 is the "lock interface" key. F9 refreshes. And selecting multiple items with control or shift doesn't work; you need to use the little check column. WTF, IBM?
Instead of all the options being in one place, different options and configuration screens are accessed through completely different menus, with no logic as to which option is available in which menu. WTF, IBM?
Notes insists on putting that stupid email header with a picture and scroll boxes on every fracking email. I guess it's designed to look like stationery, or like a formal memo. But that fancy header takes 800 bytes. And when you replicate that over a chain of emails with quoted history, it starts taking up a good bit of space. WTF, IBM?
And speaking of quoting emails... trimming quoted emails is a major pain in the ass. Say you want to trim the ten quoted emails down to two, because your idiot coworkers don't... if you accidentally move the mouse just a little bit, and highlight beyond the magical invisible point in the quoted text, it selects all of the quoted material, and there's no way to back up other than starting over. WTF, IBM?
There's no way to just delete the attachment on emails in your inbox, so they sit there cluttering up space. I know you can download the attachment, but you can't save the email in with the rest of them. I want to be able to delete the attachment and keep the email in my inbox. And please delete the attachment automatically with replies... I'm tired of seeing the 3mb file I emailed out turning up in every one of the seven replies. Is that too much to ask?
Often when the "how much did that cost?" question is asked, they're thinking "how much of my money did that cost?", with their money being in the form of taxes.
The first stage is recoverable. Not sure if it's reused, but certainly useful for analysis.
Forgot to add that the caterpillar is very strong... he works out a lot. Don't worry about him flying off the rope.
BDB = Big Dumb Booster, aka large, heavy, disposable, simple, (hopefully) cheap rocket.
You're thinking of making a big tower (like a really large skyscraper). That wouldn't work. You have to approach the problem differently.
A simplified explanation of a space elevator is to take a really long, really strong cable (nanotubes), hang a weight on the end (more cable, an asteroid, lots of metal, etc), and anchor it on the equator. The weight goes out beyond geostationary orbit, and the tension of your cable pulls in on the counterweight to keep it from flying away. The tension keeps your cable taut. You can then run "cars" or "trains" up and down the cable on motorized wheels, most likely with electric power (solar, beamed microwave, or conducted through the cable). Your car can travel nice and slow, and be more efficient than a rocket.
If this doesn't make sense, imagine tying a weight to the end of a string, holding on to the other end, and spinning in circles. The weight will be held out at the end of the string and appear stationary relative to (since you're spinning too). Now put a caterpillar on that string that walks to the counterweight and back to you.
In short, the advantage is that you can use electrical power (which you don't have to carry with you) converted to direct mechanical energy to climb into orbit, instead of expelling fuel (less efficient) that you do have to carry with you. Your vehicle ("car") structure is simpler, more robust, and cheaper than a rocket. The elevator itself would be quite expensive, and requires some advances in materials science, but isn't physically impossible.
"The first space elevator will be built about fify years after everyone stops laughing."
-Arthur C. Clarke
No. Guns are designed to stop people. That makes them excellent tools for self-defense, as the object of self-defense is to stop someone who is attacking you...
Knives are designed for cutting things. Those things may be human flesh, or may be carrots or cardboard. A knife can be a decent tool for self-defense, but requires you to let the attacker get close - a definite disadvantage as compared to a gun.
To add... the advantage of the gun for lawful self-defense is that it is usable by everyone. A knife requires its user to have at least some physical strength and speed, since you're fighting in close to someone and the weapon requires direct manual input of force. Clubs, sticks, bats, etc. are similar. The gun only requires that you be strong enough to point it and shoot. It lets the elderly man defend himself against a group of young thugs; it lets the old grandmother defend her house against the teenager that broke in (funny story: one old lady held the guy at gunpoint and made him call the cops on himself ), it lets the petite 95-pound woman defend herself against a 250lb would-be rapist.
If you're really concerned about gun violence, lets figure out why people do that to begin with, and attack the root cause. Better education and a justice system that intervenes with delinquents early on (instead of just giving slaps on the wrists until a serious crime is committed) would go a long way towards this.
I say we make a third house of Congress, whose only power is to repeal laws with a 1/3 minority vote.
Eliminating the EC might make everyone's vote "equal", but then we'll see candidates going to the major cities--LA, NYC, Chicago, Atlanta, Dallas, etc. A handful of isolated spots on the map will get all the attention, and everyone not in those cities gets told to fuck off, cause the city people know what's best for everyone.
Exactly. I'm tired of seeing the people in the "big cities" of various states thinking they know what's best for everyone and trying to set policy for the rest of the state. They want everyone to live just like they do in the city... which I'll pass on, thanks.
The problem is that so many software patents try to protect end results, rather than the specific process. "Tagging of digital photographs by insertion of data at $point in $process manner" might be patentable, if it's unconventional and non-obvious. "Tagging digital photographs with short text strings" is not patentable.
An analogy might be a patent on "converting stored chemical energy into rotary mechanical power by combustion", which would basically cover steam engines, turboshafts, internal combustion/diesel engines, etc. The patent tries to cover everything that gives you a desired result, rather than the specific process by which it is acutally done.