Clearly you are living in an oppressive nation whose traditions and beliefs run contrary to your way of life. I suggest you quickly pack up your meagre belongings, and, in the middle of the night, climb the wall into West Berl...I mean, Canada!
What he's saying is that the atoms in a given object will increase or decrease their speed of vibration in relation to the amount of heat energy present in the object. So he's technically right - the movement of those atoms could never exceed the speed of light, meaning there's a physical limit to the temperature which could be attained with a finite supply of energy.
It's not just the mailmen, it's people in general. That's why all these complaints about "the increasing gap between the rich and the poor" are such nonsense - you have only to look at the standard of living for people doing the most menial trades in order to realize that "the poor" have a better lifestyle today than they have at any other time in history.
My point isn't really to talk about this specific case, but to address what I think the OP was totally incorrect about. That we have no expectation of privacy when bringing in a PC to a tech to repair.
Except that he was 100% correct. Listen, if I ask a plumber to come over and fix my sink, I'm not going to leave 100 kilos of uncut columbine on the kitchen table, and a dead hooker on the living-room couch. I'd probably want to take the time to tidy up a bit before he came over. And if I happen to be stupid enough to leave the evidence lying around, then I absolutely deserve to be arrested, charged, and locked up. Stupidity is not a valid excuse in the eyes of the law.
Conductivity is not a binary thing. Given enough potential (voltage, for you lay folks), the molecules in nearly any substance will arrange themselves into a conductive bridge
Sure, but you need a difference in potential for that to happen, and you won't get one unless the UAV creates a bridge between the line and the ground. Birds have been partying on power lines for about a century now, so it's pretty silly to assume there's going to be massive disasters caused by UAV's emulating them.
Let's face it - with a few notable exceptions, FOSS tends to attract zealous, dogmatic, fiercely independent people whose idea of good interpersonal communication usually involves a die with more than six sides and some Monty Python quotes.
Not to burst your bubble, but Tesla's still having some pretty big problems, and has still been unable to ship any vehicles to their customers. More importantly, even if viable, their roadster isn't exactly a family-class vehicle, and is far from affordable. Their "white star" program was supposed to be better suited for the average family, however, last I heard they had abandoned that project in order to fix problems with the roadster. Even assuming they get the whitestar project back on line, how long will it take for them to have a vehicle on the market? Judging by their performance so far, you can bet it won't be any time soon.
Meantime, the Chevy Volt looks pretty promising, and should be available for 2010. It's not a pure-electric vehicle, but that's an advantage rather than a drawback, if you ask me. I figure by 2015, all major manufacturers will have at least one volt-like vehicle ready for production. I hope to get one myself by 2012.
According to the official stats, you should be getting 24 mpg on the highway, and 18 mpg overall. My 2006 charger does better than that, and I consider IT to be a gas guzzler.
Don't worry, though, you're not the only person on here massively misrepresenting the fuel-economy of their vehicle. There's been quite a few posts from people who seem to think that their up-armoured hummer is getting 100 mpg.
Instead of saddling American consumers with extra costs, why don't we mandate that all agencies that receive money from Congress must not use cars with a MPG below 35?
Because no infantryman would volunteer to patrol the streets of Baghdad in an up-armoured Prius.
Besides, it's hard to say the phrase "MOUNT UP!" in a serious tone of voice when you're looking at a neon-pink yupee conveyance.
Although, on the other hand, the idea of segway-borne light infantry has some interesting possibilities....
Now we learn we shouldn't let fundamentalist christians claim power because they're prone to incompetence.
No, the real lesson here is that there's a large portion of the population which will never be able to see beyond simple stereotypes. The US has one of the lowest unemployment rates in the world and continues to create jobs on a monthly basis, yet all you can do is point and say "HUH HUH, DUBYA DUMB!! KILL ECONOMY!! WAR BAD!!". If electing "fundamentalist christians" is such a huge problem for the economy, then what the fuck excuse have the French got? Spain? Even the Germans have more than 7% of their population unemployed. Are you planning on blaming "fundamentalist christians" for all of that, too?
Yes, we certainly are going through a learning process, but you seem to be the bad example rather than one of the students.
Come for a stroll with me through Jane and Finch some time. I've got a great t-shirt for you to wear. Might help you figure out that without the freedom to bare arms, all your other freedoms are an illusion.
Excuse, reason, they're the same thing. Neither one's worth a penny to me. If you make a promise, I expect you to keep it. That's all.
Now, if a company's willing to compensate me for the inconvenience, I might be willing to accept their excuses. Otherwise, there's no point wasting breath.
While westerners may be viewed as shrewd and dishonest through some cultural norms, we are generally of good intent although far from perfect. If people from other parts expect the western world to be indebted to helping the world's poorest, they should at least give us the benefit of the doubt we are not doing it for profit.
Anyone who thinks that westerners are "shrewd and dishonest" has never gone shopping in a middle-east marketplace.
That's the only purpose of cameras in general. You don't put a security camera in a store because you think it will magically stop people from stealing - you put it in so that people who steal from you can be caught afterwards.
One possible solution: build more bays. Sure, it's disruptive for the surrounding ecology, but no more so than what we've done for hydroelectric dams on rivers.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm sure he meant to say "it was just aluminum, which doesn't burn while being ground".
Let's not assume stupidity where a simple misunderstanding is possible.
You may have just discovered the REAL purpose behind the invasion of Iraq....
Clearly you are living in an oppressive nation whose traditions and beliefs run contrary to your way of life. I suggest you quickly pack up your meagre belongings, and, in the middle of the night, climb the wall into West Berl...I mean, Canada!
As opposed to all those times in history when everyone was guaranteed housing? :)
What he's saying is that the atoms in a given object will increase or decrease their speed of vibration in relation to the amount of heat energy present in the object. So he's technically right - the movement of those atoms could never exceed the speed of light, meaning there's a physical limit to the temperature which could be attained with a finite supply of energy.
It's not just the mailmen, it's people in general. That's why all these complaints about "the increasing gap between the rich and the poor" are such nonsense - you have only to look at the standard of living for people doing the most menial trades in order to realize that "the poor" have a better lifestyle today than they have at any other time in history.
With such a poor understanding of economics, it's surprising you were ever able to afford a computer!
Not to burst your bubble, but Tesla's still having some pretty big problems, and has still been unable to ship any vehicles to their customers. More importantly, even if viable, their roadster isn't exactly a family-class vehicle, and is far from affordable. Their "white star" program was supposed to be better suited for the average family, however, last I heard they had abandoned that project in order to fix problems with the roadster. Even assuming they get the whitestar project back on line, how long will it take for them to have a vehicle on the market? Judging by their performance so far, you can bet it won't be any time soon.
Meantime, the Chevy Volt looks pretty promising, and should be available for 2010. It's not a pure-electric vehicle, but that's an advantage rather than a drawback, if you ask me. I figure by 2015, all major manufacturers will have at least one volt-like vehicle ready for production. I hope to get one myself by 2012.
According to the official stats, you should be getting 24 mpg on the highway, and 18 mpg overall. My 2006 charger does better than that, and I consider IT to be a gas guzzler.
Don't worry, though, you're not the only person on here massively misrepresenting the fuel-economy of their vehicle. There's been quite a few posts from people who seem to think that their up-armoured hummer is getting 100 mpg.
Besides, it's hard to say the phrase "MOUNT UP!" in a serious tone of voice when you're looking at a neon-pink yupee conveyance.
Although, on the other hand, the idea of segway-borne light infantry has some interesting possibilities....
Evidence?
Yes, we certainly are going through a learning process, but you seem to be the bad example rather than one of the students.
Thank you for inserting your totally unrelated penny and a half into the conversation.
It's a well-known fact that cows produce massive amounts of GHG's.
So just think how much global warming DINO FARTS would have produced!
Seriously, it's no wonder our ancestors never got a break until those polluting beasts kicked the bucket.
Come for a stroll with me through Jane and Finch some time. I've got a great t-shirt for you to wear. Might help you figure out that without the freedom to bare arms, all your other freedoms are an illusion.
No we don't.
Excuse, reason, they're the same thing. Neither one's worth a penny to me. If you make a promise, I expect you to keep it. That's all.
Now, if a company's willing to compensate me for the inconvenience, I might be willing to accept their excuses. Otherwise, there's no point wasting breath.
Did you fall on your head, or something?
Oh, never mind, looks like you can still think rationally.
Then again
Or in many parts of Europe, for that matter...
That's the only purpose of cameras in general. You don't put a security camera in a store because you think it will magically stop people from stealing - you put it in so that people who steal from you can be caught afterwards.
One possible solution: build more bays. Sure, it's disruptive for the surrounding ecology, but no more so than what we've done for hydroelectric dams on rivers.