Just asked Siri on my ipod "Can you get chickenpox from chickens" and all it did was come up with a list of ~15 websites, the top being WebMD, as well as ~15 images of chickenpox rashes.
So, tl;dr version, pretty much the same results as using Google voice search in my GNote2.
OK, so I go out and collect enough muddy water in a non-contaminated vessel, and happen to have a microscope powerful enough to see particulate matter that can be airborn for 2-3k+ Miles. Say it turns out to be volcanic in origin... then what? I personally have access to a XRD machine, but scans would show.... nothing since volcanic glass is amorphous ( no crystal structure ). Maybe the XRF could pick out a few peaks from microcrystalline structures, but it's highly unlikely that I can get a fine enough focus unless I luck out with a very large light chunk of ash... but funding for the sciences has been going down steadily for over a decade ( cut 80%+ in the last 12 years here ) and the XRF machine has been down for almost as long. We don't even have a mass spectrometer... the only reason our XRD machine is still running is a large school in the next state occasionally sends us stuff to XRD, and will run some of our stuff on their SEM.
Most people wouldn't even have access to a powerful microscope, much less any of the other geochemical tools needed.
Then say I did get same data of chemical / mineral composition, where is the geochemical database for recently recently erupted volcanoes? I can't say with any type of certainty that this eruption came from X volcano since it closely matches the rock compositions from the last eruption 600 years ago. Even data from 6mos - 1 year+ is sketchy since it would be more than possible that the melt from this eruption is chemically distinct from the prior one ( hence why it stopped for a while, then restarted ).
TL;DR: The most a lay person could really do is identify the general origin as being volcanic / or possibly wood in origin, and only if they happen to have a REALLY strong microscope.
So it's basically like the Debian installer, except for the part where you need two reboots (wth, seriously?).
It's only because Windows doesn't have chroot. You boot the install media, it starts a live environment that only runs an installer ( VS. many "modern" Linux installers where you start desktop, find the icon for the installer launcher / launch it from a terminal ) which sets up disk partitioning and filesystems then copies over system files >> reboot to an installer environment on ( generally, sometimes in a VM) hard iron to unpack / configure everything >> standard boot.
If MS wanted to bother adding and testing code against tons and tons of oddball hardware configs to the installer they could MAKE a chroot type program and only require one reboot, but it would be just one more point of failure with added potential bugs to boot. Much easier to take the 30-90 extra seconds ( depending on hardware age ) to reboot on the off chance that someone needs to install from media.
Most places where savings could be had from high multiples of installations would have an image the flash to the HDD anyways, not install from physical media for hundreds / thousands of PCs.
Ahh, but that 3mm per annum is GLOBAL sea level rise. You need to look a RELATIVE sea level change ( in which GLOBAL sea level change plays a more minor role) in a per area basis due to crustal load change from isostatic / subsidence adjustments ( for example pile a bunch of sediment on the crust and it sinks from the extra weight ), and just plain changes in sedimentation / erosion rates. Don't forget that sea level displacement is somewhere in the 200-300:1 intrusion:height ration. That means for every 1mm of rise the water will go inland on average 200-300mm.
Of course this also ignores the fact that rapid compaction can be an issue in many places that are earthquake prone - the water running from cracks in the ground after an earthquake is literally squeezed out of the sediments in the ground compacting and shifting into a tighter mass, which then sits mm to meters closer to sea level ( or lower if it is in a basin ).
In other words, it's probably a bunch of BS that in 30 years there will be many airports underwater, but it IS possible. A structural / sedimentary Geologist could give a better report backed by data, but each specific locality would have to be studied individually, a study of the west coast where earthquakes are more common wouldn't apply to the east coast where the continental margin is quiescent for example.
This is nothing new. 100 years ago, in small communities, the doctor or the preacher was the most learned person so the community deferred to them for all sorts of decisions. Often, their advice was wrong and led to all sorts of negative outcomes. Why? Because those doctors and preachers were learned, but they weren't often qualified in the areas they were being asked to advise on.
This has drastically changed in the last decade or two due in large part to changes in the education system ( I.E. a liberal education where many differing fields of study are required to graduate ) as well as the wide spread dissemination of knowledge from internet connectivity. 100 years ago said doctor / preacher may have known HOW to do research on issues not directly related to his / her field, but may not have had access to the physical books with the knowledge to be ABLE to do the research.
Look at Geologists, we have to know at the very least: Chemistry, Physics, and Mathematics on top of Geology. Then for some fields you have to add Biology and Animal Psychology, other fields need to know Nuclear Physics, Particle Physics, and a deep understanding of Thermodynamics. Many other scientific fields require at least basic knowledge of the other fields as well, meaning a Biologist could and should be able to have an informed opinion of say something in the Chemistry field, even if they don't have the absolute in depth knowledge as a Chemist does.
Could some random Joe on the street have the same qualities? Of course, there are tons of brilliant self educated people in the world. But the general public doesn't know how, or care to learn how to do proper research, hence why the less informed rely on basic websites that, to put it quite bluntly are crap, and quote them as gospel, even after they have been proven blatantly false.
On the flip side, since the camera is front facing ( so you know what you are recording, I doubt it could HUD _AND_ compress AND upload to remote storage worth a shit ) you would know if some dude was recording you with glass too... he would have to stare at you the whole time.
That's the thing, is the upgrade "free for the first year" meaning you don't have to pay for the upgrade license , or is it "free for the first year" meaning after a year you have to pay some kind of subscription fee.
For the time being I am leaning towards the first option since I haven't read anything yet that says MS will have a subscription for the OS ala Office 365 ( if there is official confirmation please do let me know! ).
A subscription for an OS just seems awkward, with too many hurdles to jump. I.E. how long a grace period for renewal, IF there is an auto-renewal option how hard is it to get canceled, especially for business what happens when the version you are on - and don't want to upgrade away from - is EOL'd... I still use a networkless Win98 machine due to upgrade costs to the machine it is connected to being $50K+ just to upgrade from a P2 / Win98 setup.
Then again it _is_ MS we are talking about, they would probably just charge ahead without thinking like usual.
What command line completion are you looking for.... magically knowing what you want so you just have to hit tab? Mavericks and Yosemite both have command completion for commands / scripts in your $PATH just like in Linux. Now if only they had "free" and a modern native build of "htop"
I do miss apt-get, and brew / macports don't work 100% with the CLI dev tools from xcode, meaning you need to install the whole 5+GB package.
As for the rest, you have choices for task switchers and finder extensions ( many of both free even ) to take care of the shortcomings, just as you can swap out features you don't like in Linux. Safari is just crap unless you want to use it for the power savings, it does manage to suck down less power somehow when compared to chrome.
Macs are great for people who love to make excuses for paying more to do less. That demographic doesn't seem to overlap with Linux users much.
So, my MBP that has Word / PS / and pretty much every terminal app other than "free" from UNIX / Linux somehow does less than a Windows box? Any games I play ( not many ) either work in crossover or a VM so that also doesn't count.
The only thing my MBP is "lacking" vs my Lenovo is HDD space ( 128GB SSD + 1TB external that I already used on the Lenovo vs. Lenovo 1TB spinning rust ) and RAM (4GB VS. 16GB which I really don't need for what I do on mobile machines, I just remote into my Desktop now). Price difference? After the RAM upgrade on the Lenovo about $250 more for the MBP. With the Mac I also gain: I can stack two MBPs to get the same height as the Lenovo, or carry 3 MBPs for the same weight, triple the battery life, a newer generation of i5 with IRIS gfx, and a better screen than the garbage 1366x768 screen in the Lenovo. The Lenovo also has an extremely shitty keyboard, case, build quality ( came from the factory missing a screw, had to be sent back immediately for keyboard failure OOTB, came back with a cracked case that had to be glued back together.... but at least "working") and trackpad, while the MBP has a great trackpad and a keyboard that doesn't, at the very least, feel like you are trying to type on a waterbed.
So, tell me again, how did I get less with my Mac purchase?
There are some nice touches that OSX does as well ( and some annoyances unfortunately ) that are not worth paying extra for, such as remembering different volume configurations for when headphones are plugged in versus on laptop speakers / HDMI sound output.
The fact that the greater majority of people who actually write the code are switching to Systemd should be a sign that it is technically superior.
So Windows is the best OS since the most people use it? Why bother with OSX and Linux then? The only reason Windows is on top is twofold: ease of use ( comes with most new computers) coupled with familiarity, and this is the reason that 8 didn't do so well... and secondly, it's cheaper than a Mac.
Don't confuse (easier / shinier) for (lazy / gloryhound) devs with technical superiority. Maybe, MAYBE, it will turn out to be better... but most likely will turn out to be as big a kludge as they claim SysVinit is.
Yet you don't address why we can't have a -o "nodelete" mount option at all.
It's been years since I have done any filesystem digging, but don't most FSs mark a file as available space and not actually "delete" the file until it is written over? Why would it be so hard to have a mount option that forbids marking used space as free... other than possibly SSD trim / automatic fragmentation control maybe?
That way you could add files to the FS but not remove them. You couldn't easily use this as a single partition / FS obviously, at least/tmp would have to be a standard mount, and updates to the system would require a remount. But I could see it being quite a nice thing to have, especially for non-tape backups.....
First off, it's not as though these words have been struck from the English lexicon. Seriously... do kids nowadays rely exclusively on the Oxford Junior Dictionary instead of doing a quick web search or consulting a more complete dictionary? I don't recall ever in my life using a "kid's" dictionary during my school years. We used the big ones right from the start.
It wasn't always perfect, of course. I recall asking my teacher what a word meant, and she correctly told me that I should look it up in the dictionary myself. I did so, found the word, and it was defined by a different word I didn't know. I looked up that word, and it used the first word in it's definition. My teacher then relented and explained the word to me herself. That's why kids have teachers and parents.
All in all, a tempest in a teacup. Kids will learn these words once they graduate to more complete resources. No big deal. Side note: I'll bet "tempest" isn't in the junior dictionary either.
So what you are saying is it's much ado about nothing?
Maybe because the original poster can't seem to parse simple tenses...
"Nuclear war loomed as an apocalyptic shadow that could possibly have brought human history to an end."
is perfectly fine. The situation today is nowhere near what we had during the cold war, firmly placing the cold war in the past. It may come to pass that the situation will change again, but that is in the future and not completely determined so has no bearing on the sign that is there today.
Russia / NK can saber rattle all they want, they won't actually DO anything though. Both try to influence world politics through threats that they will never carry out since they know they would lose just as much as anyone they attacked, if not more.
So.... you wan't a phone with touchwiz ( Samsung ) for all of sound / ringer options like turning to mute / vibrate without unlocking. And I have a deep voice and no one has complained yet about my Note2.
If you want voicemails saved use Google voice or one of the clones, it lets you save the voicemails as MP3's.
As for the "yellow pages / white pages" that is why the browser is tied to the phone app, just touch the damn number on the page and it will offer to call it for you, same with maps when you select / copy an address. It works much better than trying to shoehorn another bunch of crap into another tab in the phone app itself.
Several things here: 1: I am a scientist, and while I admit I don't know everything ( who does ? ) about climate change I have seen enough data to be concerned, not panicked mind you, but concerned; especially so since anything on a global scale has so many variables as to be be possible to accurately model.
2: While those people you linked may be ranked high in their fields, the pages you linked to don't cite papers published in a reputable journal for peer review... probably because they are not reproducible as science demands.
2.5: It may very well be that tornadic activities will be on the increase, but there are many variables as to why we may see a dip in the generally upwards trendline.
3: your third link is just braindead political bashing.
$9.99 for PS and Lightroom ( if they still offer that "photographers" bundle ) is actually pretty decent, it ends up costing about the same over the course of several years as buying an upgrade, just on PS itself, without having to cough up the money all at once. As an added bonus if you don't need to use the applications for a while you can suspend the rental until you need them again, saving a fair bit of money over the lump sum payment.
I don't know. Hydrothermal vents ETC are far more likely, the deep water would provide shielding from cosmic radiation. The first bacteria we know of, from ~3.8Ga or so were completely anoxic since the atmosphere had little to no free oxygen... and therefore no ozone to filter out the radiation that was bombarding the surface.
If life had started by surface impact you would more likely than not see adaptations passed down the generations to be resistant to radiation damage, yet we don't see any indication of that even in ancient strains that survive to modern times.
That's not to say the research isn't interesting, since it is. It just doesn't seem likely due to several factors that may or may not be solved for in the future, only time will tell.
Hmmm, that's interesting... pretty sure the original bug filer was using an AMD quad core since several mails had been about core 3 / core 4 being idle at the time of crash. I may be wrong though, I only read through it at the time it was posted on/.
Makes you wonder if it is a AMD multiple of 4 core bug somehow though, and maybe fixable through microcode patching.
so what should they have done? Just let those pieces of random garbage data take up space on the iPod for the rest of its life? Forced you to erase the whole thing just to get rid of them?
They should have gone with option 1, just left the non-working files on the device. As you said, there had been third party software that could access the files, and presumably RealMedia, or whoever sold the tracks in the first place, would still have their media manager that would be able to play the files. If the user was technically savvy enough to use a secondary store + sync software it can be presumed that they could use other software to surgically remove the files instead of clobbering the whole FS.
Instead Apple seems, and it seems to be that this case is to shed light on if it was deliberate, to have forced the choice number 2 on people, forcing them to lose data. If that's the case, when taken to an admitted extreme, it is no different than if MS formatted your computers hard drive on a reboot because you used a word processor that could output.doc files causing you to lose all of your data. Taken to a lesser extreme, it would be like MS releasing a "patch" to Windows that searched the hard drive and deleted all.doc files that had not been created by word... and called it "protecting the user from possible malicious files", I can guarantee there would have been a huge outcry over that.
and removed the songs with bogus FairPlay from people's devices, because they would no longer work.
See that's the thing, it's MY filesystem on MY device.
If the files exploited a hole in the DRM, then the DRM was patched and the files no longer work... fine, the files don't work, but you can't delete my files on my device .
Face it, Apple screwed the pooch and got called out on it. Hopefully they get a sharp smack in the nose with a newspaper, learn from the past and don't do stupid shit like this again, and everyone can move on.
How do you know that? Are you really all that sure that your eyes don't look at something that you enjoy for a tenth of a second longer than when looking at things you don't enjoy?
And yet who is to say that I wouldn't look at something for 1/10 second longer just because I absolutely hate that topping and have a hard time believing anyone sane would eat it?
The risk is low period. There have been studies of the indigenous fauna in the area, which have had many generations of breeding, and there has been found only slightly elevated genetic mutation rates, and orders of magnitude less mutations than predicted. As far as we can tell, as long as you aren't rolling around in areas directly contaminated by the core ( nearby the plant itself ) or in areas that are sheltered, lower leveled, and allowed to build up debris and a radio-isotope pool the risk is nearly identical to living next to a pesticide / chemical plant.
Radiation and radiation damage are still poorly understood, there are some arguments that low dose radiation is actually beneficial. In some areas of the world the background radiation is higher than the NRC Total Yearly Dose limits, and the people there have lower incidences of cancer and other illnesses compared to other areas with lower "safe" background doses.
Those people are poor and desperate, and the danger isn't visible to them. It's sad that they are even allowed to live and farm there, instead of being helped to build a life somewhere safer. Stunts like feeding journalists unsafe food just encourage more people to do it.
Most of the people that are still in the exclusion zone are the ones that refused to leave. They had been offered help to move and rebuild, but refused due to loyalty to the area / my family always lived here / this is MY land and I'm not leaving damnit, and ETC. Some of them HAD been forced to leave, they came back and the government just gave up on moving them again.
Slashdot Mirror
Ummm, yeah,
Just asked Siri on my ipod "Can you get chickenpox from chickens" and all it did was come up with a list of ~15 websites, the top being WebMD, as well as ~15 images of chickenpox rashes.
So, tl;dr version, pretty much the same results as using Google voice search in my GNote2.
Maybe because it's not that easy?
OK, so I go out and collect enough muddy water in a non-contaminated vessel, and happen to have a microscope powerful enough to see particulate matter that can be airborn for 2-3k+ Miles. Say it turns out to be volcanic in origin... then what? I personally have access to a XRD machine, but scans would show.... nothing since volcanic glass is amorphous ( no crystal structure ). Maybe the XRF could pick out a few peaks from microcrystalline structures, but it's highly unlikely that I can get a fine enough focus unless I luck out with a very large light chunk of ash... but funding for the sciences has been going down steadily for over a decade ( cut 80%+ in the last 12 years here ) and the XRF machine has been down for almost as long. We don't even have a mass spectrometer... the only reason our XRD machine is still running is a large school in the next state occasionally sends us stuff to XRD, and will run some of our stuff on their SEM.
Most people wouldn't even have access to a powerful microscope, much less any of the other geochemical tools needed.
Then say I did get same data of chemical / mineral composition, where is the geochemical database for recently recently erupted volcanoes? I can't say with any type of certainty that this eruption came from X volcano since it closely matches the rock compositions from the last eruption 600 years ago. Even data from 6mos - 1 year+ is sketchy since it would be more than possible that the melt from this eruption is chemically distinct from the prior one ( hence why it stopped for a while, then restarted ).
TL;DR: The most a lay person could really do is identify the general origin as being volcanic / or possibly wood in origin, and only if they happen to have a REALLY strong microscope.
So it's basically like the Debian installer, except for the part where you need two reboots (wth, seriously?).
It's only because Windows doesn't have chroot. You boot the install media, it starts a live environment that only runs an installer ( VS. many "modern" Linux installers where you start desktop, find the icon for the installer launcher / launch it from a terminal ) which sets up disk partitioning and filesystems then copies over system files >> reboot to an installer environment on ( generally, sometimes in a VM) hard iron to unpack / configure everything >> standard boot.
If MS wanted to bother adding and testing code against tons and tons of oddball hardware configs to the installer they could MAKE a chroot type program and only require one reboot, but it would be just one more point of failure with added potential bugs to boot. Much easier to take the 30-90 extra seconds ( depending on hardware age ) to reboot on the off chance that someone needs to install from media.
Most places where savings could be had from high multiples of installations would have an image the flash to the HDD anyways, not install from physical media for hundreds / thousands of PCs.
Ahh, but that 3mm per annum is GLOBAL sea level rise. You need to look a RELATIVE sea level change ( in which GLOBAL sea level change plays a more minor role) in a per area basis due to crustal load change from isostatic / subsidence adjustments ( for example pile a bunch of sediment on the crust and it sinks from the extra weight ), and just plain changes in sedimentation / erosion rates. Don't forget that sea level displacement is somewhere in the 200-300:1 intrusion:height ration. That means for every 1mm of rise the water will go inland on average 200-300mm.
Of course this also ignores the fact that rapid compaction can be an issue in many places that are earthquake prone - the water running from cracks in the ground after an earthquake is literally squeezed out of the sediments in the ground compacting and shifting into a tighter mass, which then sits mm to meters closer to sea level ( or lower if it is in a basin ).
In other words, it's probably a bunch of BS that in 30 years there will be many airports underwater, but it IS possible. A structural / sedimentary Geologist could give a better report backed by data, but each specific locality would have to be studied individually, a study of the west coast where earthquakes are more common wouldn't apply to the east coast where the continental margin is quiescent for example.
This is nothing new. 100 years ago, in small communities, the doctor or the preacher was the most learned person so the community deferred to them for all sorts of decisions. Often, their advice was wrong and led to all sorts of negative outcomes. Why? Because those doctors and preachers were learned, but they weren't often qualified in the areas they were being asked to advise on.
This has drastically changed in the last decade or two due in large part to changes in the education system ( I.E. a liberal education where many differing fields of study are required to graduate ) as well as the wide spread dissemination of knowledge from internet connectivity.
100 years ago said doctor / preacher may have known HOW to do research on issues not directly related to his / her field, but may not have had access to the physical books with the knowledge to be ABLE to do the research.
Look at Geologists, we have to know at the very least: Chemistry, Physics, and Mathematics on top of Geology. Then for some fields you have to add Biology and Animal Psychology, other fields need to know Nuclear Physics, Particle Physics, and a deep understanding of Thermodynamics.
Many other scientific fields require at least basic knowledge of the other fields as well, meaning a Biologist could and should be able to have an informed opinion of say something in the Chemistry field, even if they don't have the absolute in depth knowledge as a Chemist does.
Could some random Joe on the street have the same qualities? Of course, there are tons of brilliant self educated people in the world. But the general public doesn't know how, or care to learn how to do proper research, hence why the less informed rely on basic websites that, to put it quite bluntly are crap, and quote them as gospel, even after they have been proven blatantly false.
On the flip side, since the camera is front facing ( so you know what you are recording, I doubt it could HUD _AND_ compress AND upload to remote storage worth a shit ) you would know if some dude was recording you with glass too... he would have to stare at you the whole time.
That's the thing, is the upgrade "free for the first year" meaning you don't have to pay for the upgrade license , or is it "free for the first year" meaning after a year you have to pay some kind of subscription fee.
For the time being I am leaning towards the first option since I haven't read anything yet that says MS will have a subscription for the OS ala Office 365 ( if there is official confirmation please do let me know! ).
A subscription for an OS just seems awkward, with too many hurdles to jump. I.E. how long a grace period for renewal, IF there is an auto-renewal option how hard is it to get canceled, especially for business what happens when the version you are on - and don't want to upgrade away from - is EOL'd... I still use a networkless Win98 machine due to upgrade costs to the machine it is connected to being $50K+ just to upgrade from a P2 / Win98 setup.
Then again it _is_ MS we are talking about, they would probably just charge ahead without thinking like usual.
Simple:
It doesn't have Blender in my boot process yet.... just think of all those extra seconds I could be rendering while my PC booted going to waste.
What command line completion are you looking for.... magically knowing what you want so you just have to hit tab? Mavericks and Yosemite both have command completion for commands / scripts in your $PATH just like in Linux. Now if only they had "free" and a modern native build of "htop"
I do miss apt-get, and brew / macports don't work 100% with the CLI dev tools from xcode, meaning you need to install the whole 5+GB package.
As for the rest, you have choices for task switchers and finder extensions ( many of both free even ) to take care of the shortcomings, just as you can swap out features you don't like in Linux. Safari is just crap unless you want to use it for the power savings, it does manage to suck down less power somehow when compared to chrome.
Macs are great for people who love to make excuses for paying more to do less. That demographic doesn't seem to overlap with Linux users much.
So, my MBP that has Word / PS / and pretty much every terminal app other than "free" from UNIX / Linux somehow does less than a Windows box? Any games I play ( not many ) either work in crossover or a VM so that also doesn't count.
The only thing my MBP is "lacking" vs my Lenovo is HDD space ( 128GB SSD + 1TB external that I already used on the Lenovo vs. Lenovo 1TB spinning rust ) and RAM (4GB VS. 16GB which I really don't need for what I do on mobile machines, I just remote into my Desktop now). Price difference? After the RAM upgrade on the Lenovo about $250 more for the MBP. With the Mac I also gain: I can stack two MBPs to get the same height as the Lenovo, or carry 3 MBPs for the same weight, triple the battery life, a newer generation of i5 with IRIS gfx, and a better screen than the garbage 1366x768 screen in the Lenovo.
The Lenovo also has an extremely shitty keyboard, case, build quality ( came from the factory missing a screw, had to be sent back immediately for keyboard failure OOTB, came back with a cracked case that had to be glued back together.... but at least "working") and trackpad, while the MBP has a great trackpad and a keyboard that doesn't, at the very least, feel like you are trying to type on a waterbed.
So, tell me again, how did I get less with my Mac purchase?
There are some nice touches that OSX does as well ( and some annoyances unfortunately ) that are not worth paying extra for, such as remembering different volume configurations for when headphones are plugged in versus on laptop speakers / HDMI sound output.
The fact that the greater majority of people who actually write the code are switching to Systemd should be a sign that it is technically superior.
So Windows is the best OS since the most people use it? Why bother with OSX and Linux then? The only reason Windows is on top is twofold: ease of use ( comes with most new computers) coupled with familiarity, and this is the reason that 8 didn't do so well... and secondly, it's cheaper than a Mac.
Don't confuse (easier / shinier) for (lazy / gloryhound) devs with technical superiority. Maybe, MAYBE, it will turn out to be better... but most likely will turn out to be as big a kludge as they claim SysVinit is.
Yet you don't address why we can't have a -o "nodelete" mount option at all.
It's been years since I have done any filesystem digging, but don't most FSs mark a file as available space and not actually "delete" the file until it is written over? Why would it be so hard to have a mount option that forbids marking used space as free... other than possibly SSD trim / automatic fragmentation control maybe?
That way you could add files to the FS but not remove them. /tmp would have to be a standard mount, and updates to the system would require a remount. But I could see it being quite a nice thing to have, especially for non-tape backups.....
You couldn't easily use this as a single partition / FS obviously, at least
First off, it's not as though these words have been struck from the English lexicon. Seriously... do kids nowadays rely exclusively on the Oxford Junior Dictionary instead of doing a quick web search or consulting a more complete dictionary? I don't recall ever in my life using a "kid's" dictionary during my school years. We used the big ones right from the start.
It wasn't always perfect, of course. I recall asking my teacher what a word meant, and she correctly told me that I should look it up in the dictionary myself. I did so, found the word, and it was defined by a different word I didn't know. I looked up that word, and it used the first word in it's definition. My teacher then relented and explained the word to me herself. That's why kids have teachers and parents.
All in all, a tempest in a teacup. Kids will learn these words once they graduate to more complete resources. No big deal. Side note: I'll bet "tempest" isn't in the junior dictionary either.
So what you are saying is it's much ado about nothing?
Noise I can ignore.... what was really annoying with CRTs was the damn pinkish-purple glow the screen area had after being turned off in a dark room.
Maybe because the original poster can't seem to parse simple tenses...
"Nuclear war loomed as an apocalyptic shadow that could possibly have brought human history to an end."
is perfectly fine. The situation today is nowhere near what we had during the cold war, firmly placing the cold war in the past. It may come to pass that the situation will change again, but that is in the future and not completely determined so has no bearing on the sign that is there today.
Russia / NK can saber rattle all they want, they won't actually DO anything though. Both try to influence world politics through threats that they will never carry out since they know they would lose just as much as anyone they attacked, if not more.
So.... you wan't a phone with touchwiz ( Samsung ) for all of sound / ringer options like turning to mute / vibrate without unlocking. And I have a deep voice and no one has complained yet about my Note2.
If you want voicemails saved use Google voice or one of the clones, it lets you save the voicemails as MP3's.
As for the "yellow pages / white pages" that is why the browser is tied to the phone app, just touch the damn number on the page and it will offer to call it for you, same with maps when you select / copy an address. It works much better than trying to shoehorn another bunch of crap into another tab in the phone app itself.
Several things here:
1: I am a scientist, and while I admit I don't know everything ( who does ? ) about climate change I have seen enough data to be concerned, not panicked mind you, but concerned; especially so since anything on a global scale has so many variables as to be be possible to accurately model.
2: While those people you linked may be ranked high in their fields, the pages you linked to don't cite papers published in a reputable journal for peer review... probably because they are not reproducible as science demands.
2.5: It may very well be that tornadic activities will be on the increase, but there are many variables as to why we may see a dip in the generally upwards trendline.
3: your third link is just braindead political bashing.
Ha!
$60 - replace "new improved Clippy start menu" with a start menu that won't drive you insane.
Can you imagine it? " Hi! it looks like you are trying to start a program! can I help you with that?!" *shudder*
$9.99 for PS and Lightroom ( if they still offer that "photographers" bundle ) is actually pretty decent, it ends up costing about the same over the course of several years as buying an upgrade, just on PS itself, without having to cough up the money all at once. As an added bonus if you don't need to use the applications for a while you can suspend the rental until you need them again, saving a fair bit of money over the lump sum payment.
I don't know. Hydrothermal vents ETC are far more likely, the deep water would provide shielding from cosmic radiation. The first bacteria we know of, from ~3.8Ga or so were completely anoxic since the atmosphere had little to no free oxygen... and therefore no ozone to filter out the radiation that was bombarding the surface.
If life had started by surface impact you would more likely than not see adaptations passed down the generations to be resistant to radiation damage, yet we don't see any indication of that even in ancient strains that survive to modern times.
That's not to say the research isn't interesting, since it is. It just doesn't seem likely due to several factors that may or may not be solved for in the future, only time will tell.
Hmmm, that's interesting... pretty sure the original bug filer was using an AMD quad core since several mails had been about core 3 / core 4 being idle at the time of crash. I may be wrong though, I only read through it at the time it was posted on /.
Makes you wonder if it is a AMD multiple of 4 core bug somehow though, and maybe fixable through microcode patching.
so what should they have done? Just let those pieces of random garbage data take up space on the iPod for the rest of its life? Forced you to erase the whole thing just to get rid of them?
They should have gone with option 1, just left the non-working files on the device. As you said, there had been third party software that could access the files, and presumably RealMedia, or whoever sold the tracks in the first place, would still have their media manager that would be able to play the files. If the user was technically savvy enough to use a secondary store + sync software it can be presumed that they could use other software to surgically remove the files instead of clobbering the whole FS.
Instead Apple seems, and it seems to be that this case is to shed light on if it was deliberate, to have forced the choice number 2 on people, forcing them to lose data. If that's the case, when taken to an admitted extreme, it is no different than if MS formatted your computers hard drive on a reboot because you used a word processor that could output .doc files causing you to lose all of your data. Taken to a lesser extreme, it would be like MS releasing a "patch" to Windows that searched the hard drive and deleted all .doc files that had not been created by word... and called it "protecting the user from possible malicious files", I can guarantee there would have been a huge outcry over that.
and removed the songs with bogus FairPlay from people's devices, because they would no longer work.
See that's the thing, it's MY filesystem on MY device.
If the files exploited a hole in the DRM, then the DRM was patched and the files no longer work... fine, the files don't work, but you can't delete my files on my device .
Face it, Apple screwed the pooch and got called out on it. Hopefully they get a sharp smack in the nose with a newspaper, learn from the past and don't do stupid shit like this again, and everyone can move on.
How do you know that? Are you really all that sure that your eyes don't look at something that you enjoy for a tenth of a second longer than when looking at things you don't enjoy?
And yet who is to say that I wouldn't look at something for 1/10 second longer just because I absolutely hate that topping and have a hard time believing anyone sane would eat it?
The risk is low period. There have been studies of the indigenous fauna in the area, which have had many generations of breeding, and there has been found only slightly elevated genetic mutation rates, and orders of magnitude less mutations than predicted. As far as we can tell, as long as you aren't rolling around in areas directly contaminated by the core ( nearby the plant itself ) or in areas that are sheltered, lower leveled, and allowed to build up debris and a radio-isotope pool the risk is nearly identical to living next to a pesticide / chemical plant.
Radiation and radiation damage are still poorly understood, there are some arguments that low dose radiation is actually beneficial. In some areas of the world the background radiation is higher than the NRC Total Yearly Dose limits, and the people there have lower incidences of cancer and other illnesses compared to other areas with lower "safe" background doses.
Those people are poor and desperate, and the danger isn't visible to them. It's sad that they are even allowed to live and farm there, instead of being helped to build a life somewhere safer. Stunts like feeding journalists unsafe food just encourage more people to do it.
Most of the people that are still in the exclusion zone are the ones that refused to leave. They had been offered help to move and rebuild, but refused due to loyalty to the area / my family always lived here / this is MY land and I'm not leaving damnit, and ETC. Some of them HAD been forced to leave, they came back and the government just gave up on moving them again.