No. I cut the cord because television sucks and I never watched it so it was useless to keep around. On the other hand, I did this quite a while ago. I've only actually had television for a few short periods of my life. Well, connected television. I have a TV but I don't get any stations. I am not sure there are any available? I have one here in my hotel room but I've only turned it on twice - there wasn't anything on. I've got the internet. Why would I need TV? I've got people to help, people to talk to, and a person right here in the room with me (she's sleeping) if I get too bored. I don't have time for TV but I do like passive documentaries playing in the background or as I sleep. The internet is great for that.
You need Magic Actions for YouTube. Also, AdBlock Plus. You can get rid of all those annotations, set a default bit rate, etc... It's pretty good, actually. I believe there's a Firefox version. I use Opera and I know there's a version for Chrome.
When I was young, and thought I was wise, I had a saying that I'd write all over the place - I'd stated it while tripping sack and it kind of stuck. Anyhow, I said, "Time is nothing but man's measurement for the passage of reality." I might have been right.
Go watch Brian Cox. Do it right now. Do not delay. There are many choices. Start with The Wonders of the Universe. Get the book. He's got an excellent way of describing things. He does one at the Royal Academy of Science (I think it was their traditional Christmas thingie) that is *very* good. Just go watch him. Seriously. All I watch, for the most part, is documentaries - they're entertainment and not educational for me. He is, by far, one of the best - if not the best. He's like Attenborough for Physics, Astrophysics, Quantum Mechanics, etc...
I understand that we don't need to observe it but that it can change behaviors based on the state of observation at the time - like the photons through the slits that misbehave when you leave the room.
For once, my signature is applicable. Don't worry, I changed it tomorrow to be this today. (I'll take the sleek black spaceship, thanks. It looks more interesting and the result is highly improbable.)
Are you sure? Unless I messed up my math that's about 291 MPH. The highest land speed was 231 (on Mt. Washington, where the Chain House is) until they decided to count a tropical cyclone that hit 253 MPH down in Australia. The damage you mention sounds like it might be true but you should probably be in the record books for that.
That's an INSANE amount of pressure and the speed of that must be intense. I'm kind of surprised your house survived. Heck, I'm surprised you survived. If it's tossing around stoves and steel beams that's an insane amount of force. Then again, a crazily high percentage of the World's Strongmen come from Iceland so maybe it was just one of them over at your house in a drunken rage.;-)
If I ever get out that way again (I am pretty positive I will but in the summer this time) I'll give you a yell. I do want to do some hiking up your way. Yes, yes I'll be hiring a professional guide. I'm brave, not stupid. I even hired a guide in my new area the first few times I went out just to make sure that I knew the weather because, like where you are, it turns deadly with a quickness - we lose a number of people every year to weather related issues and just plain stupidity. I'd rather not be a statistic.
I don't normally drink any more but I'll buy the Einstok. I'll even have a couple. Two's my limit. I get stupid with too many - it turns into a habit. I'm good at two, it just takes will power and I have that.
When I sold my business the, now parent, company paid XX in cash and XXX (about 2.5x as much) in shares in the parent company. Some such law prevented me from divesting those shares for 6 months after the sale. I'm not sure if it is the same with companies which are public, mine was not.
You might want to look up what is considered urban and what is considered rural by regulatory definition. It's probably not what you're thinking. It has been a while but I seem to recall that urban was defined as fifty or more people (or residencies?) per square mile. Suburban is considered urban, for example. Some towns have urban markers where they line is, they're usually on the major routes into the area. You may have never noticed but they're actually on the outskirts by quite a bit.
Hell, let me be less lazy...
Alright, skip the federal - it's also state defined. Check your local state regulations. You may be surprised at what is and isn't considered urban and rural. I'm not sure and can't find information as to what the Census used for this determination... Wait a minute. Google has to know... *sighs* The things I do for love.
Heh...
For the 2010 Census, an urban area will comprise a densely settled core of census tracts and/or census blocks that meet minimum population density requirements, along with adjacent territory containing non-residential urban land uses as well as territory with low population density included to link outlying densely settled territory with the densely settled core. To qualify as an urban area, the territory identified according to criteria must encompass at least 2,500 people, at least 1,500 of which reside outside institutional group quarters.
Yes, 2500 people or even 1500 people qualifies as 'urban.' I'd thought the definition was a bit more exactly stated but it appears not. So, no, you're likely thinking that a town of 2500 isn't included. If you think a town of 2500 people is going to have public transportation (never mind a taxi or even Uber) then you might be in for a surprise.
Anyhow, I had bumped into the data/definition in the past and thought I'd lend a hand trying to make sure that you understand why your numbers are kind of silly and not really applicable for this conversation. I worked in traffic modeling for years and there are different expectations (sometimes regulations) for throughput based on the population density. 'Snot important but your numbers, as stated, don't really mean much.
If I recall correctly, they didn't have a whole lot of Utlra to go on. The Germans had kind of, sort of, figured out that their code was being broken and the operation (it had a name, I forget it) was kept off the radio up to, and including, complete radio silence. Is it forgivable? Yes, sort of. Why they didn't have advance scouts and keep a fortified line is beyond me, but I have the gift of hindsight (as you stated).
Surprise! Those rascally Krauts have sneaked through the Ardennes again! Boy don't we have some egg on our face! I *never* would have thought they'd do that again! I mean, they've done it throughout history - in this war and all throughout the War to End All Wars so it's not likely they'll try it again - no.... Yes, the gift of hindsight is valid but it was still pretty dumb and especially dumb to not have roving patrols 50 miles or so ahead of the line. Or, you know, not frigging camp right next to the woods or in the woods. And, you know, set up reliable communication before hunkering down for the winter. Or, you know, maybe - just maybe, having re-enforcements right handy because the war's not over and this *is* the front line. But, hey, what do I know?
We did learn a lesson from it, by the way. We often try to stay within artillery range (if possible) and have planes on standby that can actually fly in inclement weather and target more effectively during it.
Nor should the police department be fighting this. Have they completely forgotten who they work for? It's not my money they're spending, but I'd be pretty pissed if they were and were then unwilling to tell me what they're doing with it. That's above and beyond the idea that they have some sort of right to keep information from the people who are paying their salary.
The article only proves that people are stupid. It doesn't prove that it is inherently bad. You should know that. I'm also not a zealot or anything. I think closed source is just fine. However, it's not inherently evil. It's just that people can take advantage of stupid people regardless of how the source is licensed.
I do. I live in the US. We can place things in the public domain at will. All of it includes a "Public Domain" bit of gibberish in it. You can steal it (I guess) and sell it, you can change it, you can throw sticks at it. I don't care. It's not good enough to do anything worth paying for - often it's simply scripts to do something I needed. Hell, not even often, I've not done so in years. I'm a much more passive consumer than I used to be.
If you're curious about the legality, it's called "dedicating" and there's a little information here: http://fairuse.stanford.edu/ov...
The whole thing's an interesting read, though. I do have, well had, several patents and a bunch of internal code that was protected but that's not the stuff I release to the public. That code wasn't very good, either. That's why I hired professionals.
I think I'll just stay the way I am until it's cool again. I've seen my clothing choices go in and out of fashion a couple of times. It was kind of strange being labeled a hipster, though. Next, I'll be a foodie because I grow, hunt, and fish for much of my food when I'm home.
I'm pretty pro-nuke, as is evidenced from my past posts on the subject. However, there's a big difference between an x-ray and particulates that accumulate and continue to release radiation. I'm not sure if that's what this is, in this case. I am sure that the two aren't comparable, however.
Which is why you're on my 'friends' list. It's funny to see the people who double down on their mistakes. They'll insist their right. They're almost as bad as the ones who don't reply - you know, damned well, they got automatic reply notifications.
It's a lot easier, and honest, to just admit you're wrong and learn something. This is not a bad thing. It's a good thing to learn something - and even to change your opinions or course of action based on new information. Yet, somehow, this is seen as a bad thing. I do not know why, I can only presume it is ego but I can't understand why others appear to cheer it on or support it. As mentioned in another thread, it's as silly as people getting mad when some politician changes their view based on new information. No! They learned something! How evil!!!
Radiation can cause cancer in most parts of the body, in all animals, and at any age, although radiation-induced solid tumors usually take 10–15 years, and can take up to 40 years, to become clinically manifest, and radiation-induced leukemias typically require 2–10 years to appear.
I, umm, didn't even read the summary completely so I don't have a point or anything. I'm just including this so that we have some actual facts that can be cited. Hell, I'm not even sure who the facts support. However, now we have some because I was, for once, not lazy. You're welcome. I don't know if they're the correct facts or even the information needed but, damn it, we've got data!
Now back to your regularly scheduled poop flinging and screeching.
Sadly, they won't. I've noticed their posts since they decided I was their foe. She simply refuses to look at, confirm, or accept any contrary evidence and will repeat the same thing in another thread - even when given proof that the opposite is true. They appear to be an otherwise thinking person but some subjects make them immune to facts. It's kind of pathetic when you can't admit you're wrong and continue to spout the same drivel over and over again as if it's factual. To pat myself on the back, I'm wrong so often that I've acclimated to it.
Oh, I know. The US was just as stupid. Surprise! The Germans are sneaking through the Ardennes again (thanks for spelling correction, by the way). No way they can get the tanks through that! I mean, they didn't just do that four years earlier with lesser tanks than they have now! No sirree Bob. We'll just camp here for the Winter. Those silly Germans won't notice our giant stockpile of fuel and weapons in Antwerp and stomp right through the Ardennes again! They wouldn't dare!
Slashdot Mirror
No. I cut the cord because television sucks and I never watched it so it was useless to keep around. On the other hand, I did this quite a while ago. I've only actually had television for a few short periods of my life. Well, connected television. I have a TV but I don't get any stations. I am not sure there are any available? I have one here in my hotel room but I've only turned it on twice - there wasn't anything on. I've got the internet. Why would I need TV? I've got people to help, people to talk to, and a person right here in the room with me (she's sleeping) if I get too bored. I don't have time for TV but I do like passive documentaries playing in the background or as I sleep. The internet is great for that.
You need Magic Actions for YouTube. Also, AdBlock Plus. You can get rid of all those annotations, set a default bit rate, etc... It's pretty good, actually. I believe there's a Firefox version. I use Opera and I know there's a version for Chrome.
It's like rain - on your wedding day!
Isn't it ionic, don't you think?
When I was young, and thought I was wise, I had a saying that I'd write all over the place - I'd stated it while tripping sack and it kind of stuck. Anyhow, I said, "Time is nothing but man's measurement for the passage of reality." I might have been right.
Sure, first they say Pluto is not a planet and next they're going to say it's not the universe. I see where this is going...
You're just a figment of my imagination and my psychiatrist (also a figment of my imagination) was right.
Go watch Brian Cox. Do it right now. Do not delay. There are many choices. Start with The Wonders of the Universe. Get the book. He's got an excellent way of describing things. He does one at the Royal Academy of Science (I think it was their traditional Christmas thingie) that is *very* good. Just go watch him. Seriously. All I watch, for the most part, is documentaries - they're entertainment and not educational for me. He is, by far, one of the best - if not the best. He's like Attenborough for Physics, Astrophysics, Quantum Mechanics, etc...
Go watch him now. Right now.
I understand that we don't need to observe it but that it can change behaviors based on the state of observation at the time - like the photons through the slits that misbehave when you leave the room.
For once, my signature is applicable. Don't worry, I changed it tomorrow to be this today. (I'll take the sleek black spaceship, thanks. It looks more interesting and the result is highly improbable.)
Are you sure? Unless I messed up my math that's about 291 MPH. The highest land speed was 231 (on Mt. Washington, where the Chain House is) until they decided to count a tropical cyclone that hit 253 MPH down in Australia. The damage you mention sounds like it might be true but you should probably be in the record books for that.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
That's an INSANE amount of pressure and the speed of that must be intense. I'm kind of surprised your house survived. Heck, I'm surprised you survived. If it's tossing around stoves and steel beams that's an insane amount of force. Then again, a crazily high percentage of the World's Strongmen come from Iceland so maybe it was just one of them over at your house in a drunken rage. ;-)
If I ever get out that way again (I am pretty positive I will but in the summer this time) I'll give you a yell. I do want to do some hiking up your way. Yes, yes I'll be hiring a professional guide. I'm brave, not stupid. I even hired a guide in my new area the first few times I went out just to make sure that I knew the weather because, like where you are, it turns deadly with a quickness - we lose a number of people every year to weather related issues and just plain stupidity. I'd rather not be a statistic.
I don't normally drink any more but I'll buy the Einstok. I'll even have a couple. Two's my limit. I get stupid with too many - it turns into a habit. I'm good at two, it just takes will power and I have that.
When I sold my business the, now parent, company paid XX in cash and XXX (about 2.5x as much) in shares in the parent company. Some such law prevented me from divesting those shares for 6 months after the sale. I'm not sure if it is the same with companies which are public, mine was not.
One if by ARP two if TCP ...
And I on the opposite hub will be
Ready to boot to Intel or ARM
Encrypting my data so no server farm
I have no shame.
You might want to look up what is considered urban and what is considered rural by regulatory definition. It's probably not what you're thinking. It has been a while but I seem to recall that urban was defined as fifty or more people (or residencies?) per square mile. Suburban is considered urban, for example. Some towns have urban markers where they line is, they're usually on the major routes into the area. You may have never noticed but they're actually on the outskirts by quite a bit.
Hell, let me be less lazy...
Alright, skip the federal - it's also state defined. Check your local state regulations. You may be surprised at what is and isn't considered urban and rural. I'm not sure and can't find information as to what the Census used for this determination... Wait a minute. Google has to know... *sighs* The things I do for love.
Heh...
For the 2010 Census, an urban area will comprise a densely settled core of census tracts and/or census blocks that meet minimum population density requirements, along with adjacent territory containing non-residential urban land uses as well as territory with low population density included to link outlying densely settled territory with the densely settled core. To qualify as an urban area, the territory identified according to criteria must encompass at least 2,500 people, at least 1,500 of which reside outside institutional group quarters.
Source:
https://www.census.gov/geo/ref...
Yes, 2500 people or even 1500 people qualifies as 'urban.' I'd thought the definition was a bit more exactly stated but it appears not. So, no, you're likely thinking that a town of 2500 isn't included. If you think a town of 2500 people is going to have public transportation (never mind a taxi or even Uber) then you might be in for a surprise.
Anyhow, I had bumped into the data/definition in the past and thought I'd lend a hand trying to make sure that you understand why your numbers are kind of silly and not really applicable for this conversation. I worked in traffic modeling for years and there are different expectations (sometimes regulations) for throughput based on the population density. 'Snot important but your numbers, as stated, don't really mean much.
If I recall correctly, they didn't have a whole lot of Utlra to go on. The Germans had kind of, sort of, figured out that their code was being broken and the operation (it had a name, I forget it) was kept off the radio up to, and including, complete radio silence. Is it forgivable? Yes, sort of. Why they didn't have advance scouts and keep a fortified line is beyond me, but I have the gift of hindsight (as you stated).
Surprise! Those rascally Krauts have sneaked through the Ardennes again! Boy don't we have some egg on our face! I *never* would have thought they'd do that again! I mean, they've done it throughout history - in this war and all throughout the War to End All Wars so it's not likely they'll try it again - no.... Yes, the gift of hindsight is valid but it was still pretty dumb and especially dumb to not have roving patrols 50 miles or so ahead of the line. Or, you know, not frigging camp right next to the woods or in the woods. And, you know, set up reliable communication before hunkering down for the winter. Or, you know, maybe - just maybe, having re-enforcements right handy because the war's not over and this *is* the front line. But, hey, what do I know?
We did learn a lesson from it, by the way. We often try to stay within artillery range (if possible) and have planes on standby that can actually fly in inclement weather and target more effectively during it.
"We've always been at war with East Asia." (Or was that one word? It's been a while.)
Nor should the police department be fighting this. Have they completely forgotten who they work for? It's not my money they're spending, but I'd be pretty pissed if they were and were then unwilling to tell me what they're doing with it. That's above and beyond the idea that they have some sort of right to keep information from the people who are paying their salary.
The article only proves that people are stupid. It doesn't prove that it is inherently bad. You should know that. I'm also not a zealot or anything. I think closed source is just fine. However, it's not inherently evil. It's just that people can take advantage of stupid people regardless of how the source is licensed.
I do. I live in the US. We can place things in the public domain at will. All of it includes a "Public Domain" bit of gibberish in it. You can steal it (I guess) and sell it, you can change it, you can throw sticks at it. I don't care. It's not good enough to do anything worth paying for - often it's simply scripts to do something I needed. Hell, not even often, I've not done so in years. I'm a much more passive consumer than I used to be.
If you're curious about the legality, it's called "dedicating" and there's a little information here:
http://fairuse.stanford.edu/ov...
Specifically here:
http://fairuse.stanford.edu/ov...
The whole thing's an interesting read, though. I do have, well had, several patents and a bunch of internal code that was protected but that's not the stuff I release to the public. That code wasn't very good, either. That's why I hired professionals.
I think I'll just stay the way I am until it's cool again. I've seen my clothing choices go in and out of fashion a couple of times. It was kind of strange being labeled a hipster, though. Next, I'll be a foodie because I grow, hunt, and fish for much of my food when I'm home.
A part of me, probably a larger part than is healthy, is still hoping for Godzilla.
I'm pretty pro-nuke, as is evidenced from my past posts on the subject. However, there's a big difference between an x-ray and particulates that accumulate and continue to release radiation. I'm not sure if that's what this is, in this case. I am sure that the two aren't comparable, however.
Which is why you're on my 'friends' list. It's funny to see the people who double down on their mistakes. They'll insist their right. They're almost as bad as the ones who don't reply - you know, damned well, they got automatic reply notifications.
It's a lot easier, and honest, to just admit you're wrong and learn something. This is not a bad thing. It's a good thing to learn something - and even to change your opinions or course of action based on new information. Yet, somehow, this is seen as a bad thing. I do not know why, I can only presume it is ego but I can't understand why others appear to cheer it on or support it. As mentioned in another thread, it's as silly as people getting mad when some politician changes their view based on new information. No! They learned something! How evil!!!
Some Wikipedia "facts."
Radiation can cause cancer in most parts of the body, in all animals, and at any age, although radiation-induced solid tumors usually take 10–15 years, and can take up to 40 years, to become clinically manifest, and radiation-induced leukemias typically require 2–10 years to appear.
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
I, umm, didn't even read the summary completely so I don't have a point or anything. I'm just including this so that we have some actual facts that can be cited. Hell, I'm not even sure who the facts support. However, now we have some because I was, for once, not lazy. You're welcome. I don't know if they're the correct facts or even the information needed but, damn it, we've got data!
Now back to your regularly scheduled poop flinging and screeching.
Sadly, they won't. I've noticed their posts since they decided I was their foe. She simply refuses to look at, confirm, or accept any contrary evidence and will repeat the same thing in another thread - even when given proof that the opposite is true. They appear to be an otherwise thinking person but some subjects make them immune to facts. It's kind of pathetic when you can't admit you're wrong and continue to spout the same drivel over and over again as if it's factual. To pat myself on the back, I'm wrong so often that I've acclimated to it.
Oh, I know. The US was just as stupid. Surprise! The Germans are sneaking through the Ardennes again (thanks for spelling correction, by the way). No way they can get the tanks through that! I mean, they didn't just do that four years earlier with lesser tanks than they have now! No sirree Bob. We'll just camp here for the Winter. Those silly Germans won't notice our giant stockpile of fuel and weapons in Antwerp and stomp right through the Ardennes again! They wouldn't dare!
*sighs* Yes, my country is full of idiots too.