
Take it out in the woods and shoot it. Twice.
425 publicly visible posts • joined 19 Apr 2011
Its an interesting idea that's not occurred to me before: Universe expanding in all four dimensions. Certainly the idea that the speed of light has somehow changed over the eons, or that the basic electrical properties of free space may have changed has occurred to me.
Let me see - space expanding so it becomes less dense - so permittivity and permeability decrease - so EM waves speed up - or time appears to slow down.
I'm sure Mr Destroy All Monsters is about to flame me.
Well its just a bit of a slap in the face - buy shiny new gadget, see price reduction within a couple of months after the initial release. Seems a bit unfair and all credit to them for giving out these refund vouchers, even under limited terms. Still happy enough with mine despite these unfavourable events.
Makes sense to use this spot for science missions - I'm thinking telescopes and other sensors you want to be permanently shielded from Earth. But why send men there? Unless they are really really fed up with being in contact with Earth. Perhaps they are fed up with American political discourse. Or those annoying phone calls about reclaiming your PPI. Or X-factor.
L1 is much more useful for humans because you remain in sight of Earth.
Back in the early 90's the ARM wasn't the only RISC micro available. What ARM did right was to recognize this and offer their solution with a low licensing cost and quality support, making it better and cheaper and lower risk to go with their licensed design than any other solution.
Well I for one appreciate a bit of scepticism and there is nothing wrong or even unusual in a publication taking a stance on an issue. If you don't like it, you don't have to agree with it or even read it (these are two different things by the way).
And as for balance, there is a balance to be struck between mankinds environmental impact (to be minimized I think even Lewis would agree) and its growth - by this I mean in particular the development of the poor parts of the human world - eliminating hunger, poverty, suffering ...
Well I for one appreciate a bit of scepticism and there is nothing wrong or even unusual in a publication taking a stance on an issue. If you don't like it, you don't have to agree with it or even read it (these are two different things by the way).
And as for balance, there is a balance to be struck between mankinds environmental impact (to be minimized I think even Lewis would agree) and its growth - by this I mean in particular the development of the poor parts of the human world - eliminating hunger, poverty, suffering ...
Ah ok, so as long as the estuary was a marine desert with little marine life and only a few migratory birds to worry about, and the tidal system wasn't entirely stopped but merely attenuated, this would be ok?
Because that's what was proposed for the Severn barrage.
I like my neighbours and get on well with them. I hate having to make the 40 minute round-trip to my "local" collection office to retrieve the undelivered package.
Still, I would rather they didn't receive my badly-disguised copy of "Busty Housewives IV" for obvious reasons.
Hand-based icon for similarly obvious reasons.
I like my neighbours and get on well with them. I hate having to make the 40 minute round-trip to my "local" collection office to retrieve the undelivered package.
Still, I would rather they didn't receive my badly-disguised copy of "Busty Housewives IV" for obvious reasons.
Hand-based icon for similarly obvious reasons.
The article is referring to the layout of the top-level blocks. Obviously the blocks themselves are done automatically.
Yes it does look like there is some wasted area in the design. All this does really is make the chip more expensive to produce (fewer chips per wafer, you see) hence lower margins. But it lowers risk - if some blocks turn out bigger than planned, you don't have to rip-up and re-do the whole thing to make it all fit. Time is money - lots of it in Apples case.
If they are shipping 5 million in the first week it seems they can afford to re-spin it in a more area-optimized form before very long. Probably already on its way.
Sites like Facebook are not anonymous - they are based on the precept that your on-line ID is the same as your real-life one. Consequently, you cannot just behave like an obscene child and get away with breaking laws such as libel (or whichever apply), or worse.
The police regularly interact with the likes of Facebook in their day -to-day work in pursuing criminals.
You have to be somewhat bullish to say the least to buy into stock and shares in these uncertain times. Facebook always looked like an over-hyped company. Its flotation doubly so. Indeed the only ones who will be left hanging their heads in shame is those foolish enough to stump up the cash at the height of the bubble.
When its going down, there is almost no bottom. Residual value is very limited as its actually a pretty small operation. Its chief exec is a loose cannon who can and has spunked no less than a billion on another small company. Sooner or later they will have to dump him, or he'll leave in a huff.
How 'cool' is that?
[/Unlike]
Because of all the power stations located along it. Power stations either use sea water, river water or cooling towers to raise their thermodynamic efficiency. They can and do raise the river water temperature by small amounts.
Because of increased agricultural run-off. More stuff dissolved in the water will lower the freezing point, again by small amounts.
Because of bigger ships using it.
I could go on ...
But considered it likely he was just good at getting media attention, raising the profile of the subject and so on and therefore an acceptable annoyance. Then he went further and further, I suppose the media tend to encourage you to do that once they have focused on you as a public image (the Colin Pilinger effect).
Then I found out he got his batchelors at my old university.
What senior management do when they've run out of ideas. Not surprising when those same senior management got where they are at the expense of every product or project they ever worked on, and to the detriment of all their former colleagues.
Managed decline. Perfect. Call it a transformation to keep the shareholders happy.