There is easy way to find out if they are guilty of the terrorist acts. Just fire the judgement missile using the freedom drone. If the target dies, then he/she was a terrorist and mission was a great success.
Choice comes because network owners have been mandated to provide their network for competitive fee (there are maximum profits and maximum costs involved here) for any and all service providers. In many cases the network is owned by independent provider that doesn't sell it to end-users. My city apartment used to have 100M/10M connection for 20€/month, 1M/1M was included in HOA fees. Very fast and easy because the line was active all the time I just changed the speed over internet without any problems, then bill was just sent accordingly.
Now I live in Finland, very rural area and here I have only one internet connection available to me. Through that connection there are 3 service providers with slightly different pricing, I pay 40€/month for 1M/1M wireless line. Eventually 3G network will reach here and then it is time to switch to that one. Only electricity comes here, other cables have been cut away long time ago because it's painful to maintain tens of kilometers of forest line for just handful of customers.
I have shifted into neutral while driving. There are no side effects, gear is just on neutral and no power is transmitted to the wheels. In my gearbox (Subaru) neutral (N) is right above drive and gear can be shifted into neutral with one push. Same goes for gear 3. Shifting to park, reverse or lower gears takes more than one push, they need lateral movement that cannot happen easily by accident. Also there is safety built in to lower gears, the gearbox won't shift to 2, or 1 unless the speed is low enough. I don't know about reverse and park, because there is no reason to try those while driving.
My anecdotal evidence (which is better than your hunch) points to a conclusion that it is possible to shift neutral while driving without causing any risk to engine, gears or car handling. Of course if gas pedal is stuck then neutral will not have any force preventing engine from revving up to the max. Continuously (a minute maybe?) keeping engine running at limit will break it eventually, but it's better than crashing.
Whenever Christianity is criticized someone has to come up with an answer that they are doing it wrong and they are not *real* Christians. Now if I interpret your answer correctly, your branch of Christianity (and the Bible) promotes/approves oral sex and pre-marital wobble jobs, right?
AGW is probably the most extraordinary claim in the history of extraordinary claims and the proposed solution (seizing most of the world's wealth, eliminating most of the current industrial base, etc.) is so far beyond extraordinary I doubt any human language even has the proper vocabulary for describing it properly. I simply demand extraordinary evidence. Since the evidence offered to date is pathetic and weak I laugh at it and call it a silly thing for silly (or evil) people.
Claiming that there is a collusion of powers around the world aiming at seizing most of the world's wealth, eliminating most of the current industrial base, etc is probably the most extraordinary claim. I simply demand extraordinary evidence that such collusion exists. Since the evidence offered to date is pathetic and weak I laugh at it and call it a silly thought for silly people. Until evidence of the collusion comes forward I will have to assume that peer reviewed scientists are doing their jobs and I believe in them.
Note: Peer reviewed science has worked so far extraordinarily well for us, I have no reason to think different this time around.
Problem is with climate change people without background in climate research talk about local weather rather than climate change. Local weather being this years temperatures, temperatures outside the window, or snowstorm/heatwave somewhere. We can also debunk the research with oneliners such as "It's because of solar activity" or "Climate has changed always, ice ages come and go" without actually understanding the science behind these events. Even the experts in these fields don't fully understand how these forcings work.
Climate change research mostly focuses in figuring out climate models and validating those models with real world observations. Without PhD or equivalent degree there is no way to be able to run the simulations that require super computer level processing power. Right now the collective peer reviewed material points towards climate change that is partially caused by human activity where CO2 is a large driver.
Of course scientists can be wrong and over the course of time they have been proven wrong. Earth wasn't flat, earth wasn't the center of the universe, sun wasn't center of the universe, earth's orbit wasn't round, newtonian physics didn't give accurate results, etc. As I see it the science gets more accurate, in climate change case as time passes we get more accurate predictions on the phenomena. Assuming that current scientists are completely wrong or that they are all faking the results is a dangerous assumption.
Would you be able to assume that the data is valid? Even if it's not valid in your opinion did the scientists back then have vested interest in global warming debate? It was in 80's, right?
You can always book a business class or economy extra tickets. I know it will cost more, but it's well worth it. I'm not as tall as you are but at 6'3" with relatively long legs I constantly get uncomfortable on standard economy seat. I have a habit of upgrading my seat with mileage points to get that economy extra seat on longer flights and suffer on shorter ones. Also Jet Blue has inch or so more leg room on economy class than other airlines, use them.
N900 has 900/1700/2100MHz UMTS, so the radio subsystems should be there for 850/1900MHz UMTS support. I think better reason is that this phone was geared towards rest of the world and Japan + US/Canada UMTS were covered with 1700MHz support.
Viable alternative really dependes on what are the requirements for the car. Gasoline-powered cars are not viable alternative to electric cars if you have a requirement to be able to run without emissions or you need full torque at all speeds.
I agree that for your lifestyle it is most likely impossible to be satisfied with electric car limitations. Many families with two cars one of them can easily be electric car without even noticing the lack of long range on one of the cars.
The console game developers face the same problems, at launch few games are successful and most not so much. Later in the cycle many games are not so successful because of installed base is still not big enough. Only after installed base has grown there is some certainty on how a particular game will do.
Therefore launch titles are often made with the support of console manufacturer, only much later truly independent titles start coming out. I wouldn't be surprised if Microsoft somehow sponsored a popular game that works only with DX10/11 or above, just to get people upgrade and get all features out from Aero.
I think it's related to consoles, because graphics card manufacturers won't create cards that are beyond the spec people are requesting and people request performance that can play games. Majority of these games will be ported to consoles and have console restrictions built in from the beginning.
Haven't you noticed that main improvements in graphics cards have been both lower price and lower power consumption? I call that quite significant development, there is no real demand to overpower the average desktops.
Biggest reason why Apple has so much money to throw around is the fact that Apple doesn't pay any dividends and lets the money sit on low interest accounts. Nokia has been a good dividend payer for years and will do so, as any mature company should. Right now market cap for Apple is huge, but it's based on future prospects with no dividend policy. I really don't know how the investors are going to get their money out of Apple. Are Apple investors waiting for LBO or liquidation? I mean regular buy and hold investor should get money back somehow from a successful company, right?
Only if they are contractually obligated to pay for GSM licensing fees. Most likely not, they let the customers to take care of these issues. In any case that debacle would be between Apple and GSM chipset manufacturer, Nokia isn't concerned about how Apple phone is made.
Slim is a lot more silent, that was the main reason why I sold my old PS3 and bought the slim version. I had the BC version of PS3 so people were willing to buy it for same price as new slim.
I believe I'm repeating what you were trying to say, but here is then same thing with slightly different words.
Employee in general isn't concerned how much "profit" employer gets from employees work. It is employers responsibility to manage the employees and pick employees with right skills at right "price". Employees on the other hand are in a free market selling their work to other employers if they get better "price" for their work.
Naturally the mechanisms of job market are not this straight forward, but if we follow The Austrian School of Economics we should forget the relation beween the "value" employees produce and "price" employees get for their work. It's all about supply and demand. To tie this back to the article we could say that if nobody is willing to pay 10x more for 10x more producing employee then that employee has to settle for smaller multiplier or not work at all.
I believe you picked up word "value" from the parent post when he clearly meant "price" in your vocabulary. The Austrian School of Economics doesn't confuse "value" and "price", they have strict distinction between these two by saying there is no natural relation between them. On the wikipedia link you provided the "price" is generally formed by sum of "value" from labor, "rent" and "profit" mashed together with supply and demand. According to the link you provided "price" has been shown a correlation with "value" from labor, which parent poster didn't accept.
I never understood this one, is it really so that raw worldwide temperature records over hundreds of years are hidden under one scientist group? I don't even believe that these few scientists were the ones who collected the raw data, that must have come from somewhere else. Why these few scientists are the only ones who have access to the raw data in first place?
I bet the data request is for the data these scientists used to create their results. That data is not useful to anyone else, for verification purposes raw data needs to be processed again, independent assumptions made and new code written to draw conclusions. If the results match then results are more valid, if not then discuss on why the results were different. Looking and picking apart someone's data hoping to find inconsistencies without understanding the thinking behind the manipulations just doesn't do the trick.
I'm not sure what is your definition of "liberal", but stem cell research is one example where traditional "conservative" view is not supported by majority of the science community. In most areas of science the research is apolitical and there are no predetermined political stances towards any outcome.
I don't believe that scientists are inherently "liberal", the politicization of the climate change has created illusion that scientists are somehow taking sides in this issue. Even in the emails released one of the researchers scolded global warming advocates in doing disservice to this issue by being too fanatic. Obviously a lot of the frustration in "conservative" camp comes from the fact that there is very little peer reviewed science pointing at the "conservative" position. In case you look into countries with multiparty systems the climate change acceptance crosses political boundaries quite easily. I think United States has become trapped in bipartisan politics where the need of being against the other party overrides sensible discussion.
My view is that science is not a popularity contest, well researched articles will get published as each of these journals compete for breakthrough science articles. At this point lack of publications supporting climate change sceptics is very telling.
I believe it would be better science if you could come up same or contradicting results with your own data set instead of the data Jones used. There are many reasons why data might not be available and even if it were available who would be able to tell if it's accurate.
Do your own research and if the results are significantly different publish an article and get famous. There is no conspiracy in getting articles published, well written science has always place in journals.
Absolutely and many mathematicians will do so and report their findings. Same goes with these climate articles, once something is published in a reputable journal there is much stronger push to either confirm or counter the findings. Unfortunately I'm not equipped with proving Fremat's last theorem or any of the climate discussion. Therefore my best option is to follow highly reputable journals and trust them to do the right thing in terms of scientific discussion.
Actually you cannot get more than one life sentence for one crime and even if you could those sentences are not joined together but served concurrently. Therefore you should be out around 10-20 years, but depending on the crime the pardon might be delayed even further.
Fair enough, I doubt that it's meant to be for everyone. I find myself spending most of my free time on computer using Facebook, Hulu, Netflix, Spotify, Slashdot, gmail and other web based applications where I have no control over my data anyways. To separate my personal life from my workstation (3D, application development, etc) would be a huge benefit for me. Not only because employer has certain level of control over my workstation, but it would also remove unnecessary distractions from my work time.
Slashdot Mirror
There is easy way to find out if they are guilty of the terrorist acts. Just fire the judgement missile using the freedom drone. If the target dies, then he/she was a terrorist and mission was a great success.
Choice comes because network owners have been mandated to provide their network for competitive fee (there are maximum profits and maximum costs involved here) for any and all service providers. In many cases the network is owned by independent provider that doesn't sell it to end-users. My city apartment used to have 100M/10M connection for 20€/month, 1M/1M was included in HOA fees. Very fast and easy because the line was active all the time I just changed the speed over internet without any problems, then bill was just sent accordingly.
Now I live in Finland, very rural area and here I have only one internet connection available to me. Through that connection there are 3 service providers with slightly different pricing, I pay 40€/month for 1M/1M wireless line. Eventually 3G network will reach here and then it is time to switch to that one. Only electricity comes here, other cables have been cut away long time ago because it's painful to maintain tens of kilometers of forest line for just handful of customers.
I have shifted into neutral while driving. There are no side effects, gear is just on neutral and no power is transmitted to the wheels. In my gearbox (Subaru) neutral (N) is right above drive and gear can be shifted into neutral with one push. Same goes for gear 3. Shifting to park, reverse or lower gears takes more than one push, they need lateral movement that cannot happen easily by accident. Also there is safety built in to lower gears, the gearbox won't shift to 2, or 1 unless the speed is low enough. I don't know about reverse and park, because there is no reason to try those while driving.
My anecdotal evidence (which is better than your hunch) points to a conclusion that it is possible to shift neutral while driving without causing any risk to engine, gears or car handling. Of course if gas pedal is stuck then neutral will not have any force preventing engine from revving up to the max. Continuously (a minute maybe?) keeping engine running at limit will break it eventually, but it's better than crashing.
I agree with you, but most Christian (especially "real" Bible based Christians) don't agree.
Whenever Christianity is criticized someone has to come up with an answer that they are doing it wrong and they are not *real* Christians. Now if I interpret your answer correctly, your branch of Christianity (and the Bible) promotes/approves oral sex and pre-marital wobble jobs, right?
AGW is probably the most extraordinary claim in the history of extraordinary claims and the proposed solution (seizing most of the world's wealth, eliminating most of the current industrial base, etc.) is so far beyond extraordinary I doubt any human language even has the proper vocabulary for describing it properly. I simply demand extraordinary evidence. Since the evidence offered to date is pathetic and weak I laugh at it and call it a silly thing for silly (or evil) people.
Claiming that there is a collusion of powers around the world aiming at seizing most of the world's wealth, eliminating most of the current industrial base, etc is probably the most extraordinary claim. I simply demand extraordinary evidence that such collusion exists. Since the evidence offered to date is pathetic and weak I laugh at it and call it a silly thought for silly people. Until evidence of the collusion comes forward I will have to assume that peer reviewed scientists are doing their jobs and I believe in them.
Note: Peer reviewed science has worked so far extraordinarily well for us, I have no reason to think different this time around.
Problem is with climate change people without background in climate research talk about local weather rather than climate change. Local weather being this years temperatures, temperatures outside the window, or snowstorm/heatwave somewhere. We can also debunk the research with oneliners such as "It's because of solar activity" or "Climate has changed always, ice ages come and go" without actually understanding the science behind these events. Even the experts in these fields don't fully understand how these forcings work.
Climate change research mostly focuses in figuring out climate models and validating those models with real world observations. Without PhD or equivalent degree there is no way to be able to run the simulations that require super computer level processing power. Right now the collective peer reviewed material points towards climate change that is partially caused by human activity where CO2 is a large driver.
Of course scientists can be wrong and over the course of time they have been proven wrong. Earth wasn't flat, earth wasn't the center of the universe, sun wasn't center of the universe, earth's orbit wasn't round, newtonian physics didn't give accurate results, etc. As I see it the science gets more accurate, in climate change case as time passes we get more accurate predictions on the phenomena. Assuming that current scientists are completely wrong or that they are all faking the results is a dangerous assumption.
Would you be able to assume that the data is valid? Even if it's not valid in your opinion did the scientists back then have vested interest in global warming debate? It was in 80's, right?
You can always book a business class or economy extra tickets. I know it will cost more, but it's well worth it. I'm not as tall as you are but at 6'3" with relatively long legs I constantly get uncomfortable on standard economy seat. I have a habit of upgrading my seat with mileage points to get that economy extra seat on longer flights and suffer on shorter ones. Also Jet Blue has inch or so more leg room on economy class than other airlines, use them.
N900 has 900/1700/2100MHz UMTS, so the radio subsystems should be there for 850/1900MHz UMTS support. I think better reason is that this phone was geared towards rest of the world and Japan + US/Canada UMTS were covered with 1700MHz support.
Viable alternative really dependes on what are the requirements for the car. Gasoline-powered cars are not viable alternative to electric cars if you have a requirement to be able to run without emissions or you need full torque at all speeds.
I agree that for your lifestyle it is most likely impossible to be satisfied with electric car limitations. Many families with two cars one of them can easily be electric car without even noticing the lack of long range on one of the cars.
The console game developers face the same problems, at launch few games are successful and most not so much. Later in the cycle many games are not so successful because of installed base is still not big enough. Only after installed base has grown there is some certainty on how a particular game will do.
Therefore launch titles are often made with the support of console manufacturer, only much later truly independent titles start coming out. I wouldn't be surprised if Microsoft somehow sponsored a popular game that works only with DX10/11 or above, just to get people upgrade and get all features out from Aero.
I think it's related to consoles, because graphics card manufacturers won't create cards that are beyond the spec people are requesting and people request performance that can play games. Majority of these games will be ported to consoles and have console restrictions built in from the beginning.
Haven't you noticed that main improvements in graphics cards have been both lower price and lower power consumption? I call that quite significant development, there is no real demand to overpower the average desktops.
Biggest reason why Apple has so much money to throw around is the fact that Apple doesn't pay any dividends and lets the money sit on low interest accounts. Nokia has been a good dividend payer for years and will do so, as any mature company should. Right now market cap for Apple is huge, but it's based on future prospects with no dividend policy. I really don't know how the investors are going to get their money out of Apple. Are Apple investors waiting for LBO or liquidation? I mean regular buy and hold investor should get money back somehow from a successful company, right?
Only if they are contractually obligated to pay for GSM licensing fees. Most likely not, they let the customers to take care of these issues. In any case that debacle would be between Apple and GSM chipset manufacturer, Nokia isn't concerned about how Apple phone is made.
That is as long as the image is taken by FBI or FBI cleared rights to that particular image.
Slim is a lot more silent, that was the main reason why I sold my old PS3 and bought the slim version. I had the BC version of PS3 so people were willing to buy it for same price as new slim.
I believe I'm repeating what you were trying to say, but here is then same thing with slightly different words.
Employee in general isn't concerned how much "profit" employer gets from employees work. It is employers responsibility to manage the employees and pick employees with right skills at right "price". Employees on the other hand are in a free market selling their work to other employers if they get better "price" for their work.
Naturally the mechanisms of job market are not this straight forward, but if we follow The Austrian School of Economics we should forget the relation beween the "value" employees produce and "price" employees get for their work. It's all about supply and demand. To tie this back to the article we could say that if nobody is willing to pay 10x more for 10x more producing employee then that employee has to settle for smaller multiplier or not work at all.
I believe you picked up word "value" from the parent post when he clearly meant "price" in your vocabulary. The Austrian School of Economics doesn't confuse "value" and "price", they have strict distinction between these two by saying there is no natural relation between them. On the wikipedia link you provided the "price" is generally formed by sum of "value" from labor, "rent" and "profit" mashed together with supply and demand. According to the link you provided "price" has been shown a correlation with "value" from labor, which parent poster didn't accept.
I never understood this one, is it really so that raw worldwide temperature records over hundreds of years are hidden under one scientist group? I don't even believe that these few scientists were the ones who collected the raw data, that must have come from somewhere else. Why these few scientists are the only ones who have access to the raw data in first place?
I bet the data request is for the data these scientists used to create their results. That data is not useful to anyone else, for verification purposes raw data needs to be processed again, independent assumptions made and new code written to draw conclusions. If the results match then results are more valid, if not then discuss on why the results were different. Looking and picking apart someone's data hoping to find inconsistencies without understanding the thinking behind the manipulations just doesn't do the trick.
I'm not sure what is your definition of "liberal", but stem cell research is one example where traditional "conservative" view is not supported by majority of the science community. In most areas of science the research is apolitical and there are no predetermined political stances towards any outcome.
I don't believe that scientists are inherently "liberal", the politicization of the climate change has created illusion that scientists are somehow taking sides in this issue. Even in the emails released one of the researchers scolded global warming advocates in doing disservice to this issue by being too fanatic. Obviously a lot of the frustration in "conservative" camp comes from the fact that there is very little peer reviewed science pointing at the "conservative" position. In case you look into countries with multiparty systems the climate change acceptance crosses political boundaries quite easily. I think United States has become trapped in bipartisan politics where the need of being against the other party overrides sensible discussion.
My view is that science is not a popularity contest, well researched articles will get published as each of these journals compete for breakthrough science articles. At this point lack of publications supporting climate change sceptics is very telling.
I believe it would be better science if you could come up same or contradicting results with your own data set instead of the data Jones used. There are many reasons why data might not be available and even if it were available who would be able to tell if it's accurate.
Do your own research and if the results are significantly different publish an article and get famous. There is no conspiracy in getting articles published, well written science has always place in journals.
Absolutely and many mathematicians will do so and report their findings. Same goes with these climate articles, once something is published in a reputable journal there is much stronger push to either confirm or counter the findings. Unfortunately I'm not equipped with proving Fremat's last theorem or any of the climate discussion. Therefore my best option is to follow highly reputable journals and trust them to do the right thing in terms of scientific discussion.
Actually you cannot get more than one life sentence for one crime and even if you could those sentences are not joined together but served concurrently. Therefore you should be out around 10-20 years, but depending on the crime the pardon might be delayed even further.
Fair enough, I doubt that it's meant to be for everyone. I find myself spending most of my free time on computer using Facebook, Hulu, Netflix, Spotify, Slashdot, gmail and other web based applications where I have no control over my data anyways. To separate my personal life from my workstation (3D, application development, etc) would be a huge benefit for me. Not only because employer has certain level of control over my workstation, but it would also remove unnecessary distractions from my work time.