maybe, but..

Still no reason not to chuck one of these on the ISS, it does need a decent engine afterall.

Who are you calling common?

see title.

Driving uninsured

Means he is not a named driver on the insured vehicle.

Not that the vehicle was uninsured, which reminds me the new expensive continious insurance requirement Will NOT stop this, what a waste of cash.

give the game away to most users?

There's an old adage somewhere about underestimating stupid.

For any mac'er who thinks he is safe because he has NOT entered his password, this is D-day..

placed spyware on his iPad

yeah that's right break a few more laws... not likely, a forensic investigation will copy data from a device only. You're confusing the QLD police with Mosad.

"this scribbler knows nothing about Greek, and not enough about English"

Strictly the translation of 'hoi polloi' from Greek is 'the majority'.

But as an adopted loanword 'hoi polloi' does not have a translation, as it IS an English word, it is NOT two English words. Its meaning is 'the people' as rabble also means 'the people'. Hence if you are to use the rabble, you should also use the hoi polloi.

see also Alcohol, a loanword from the Arabic 'al-kuhl' where 'al' translates directly as 'the'.

Damn I'm too slow.

"We couldn't find the password, and the only person who knew it wasn't there"

Because they locked Terry Childs up?

WTF

Agreed. I'm now concerned that it does not comply in some way with the 3.0 device compatibility requirements...

oh well I don't have to buy now.

Yet more confusion

My local S********s does this with vegetables.. you can buy loose [75p per KG] or in a bag of three 75p [25p each].. So how much does one weigh? god knows! they don't have a customer scales.

Wager Accepted..

The whole life costs of the watchkeeper are likely to be higher than the reaper, with no reasonable explanation, just like the initial costs, and as for easier to fly, well not likely, people need jobs! But this is acceptable as the purchasing descision is really a political decision.

Multimillion pound contracts are always political issues, and as a national decision you don't look at the cost you look at how much money is being exported. spending £15 million in the UK with only £1 going abroad is far preferable politically than spending £10 million abroad. exporting money in large chunks devalues our economy spending more money here increases our national spending and hence gdp, and increases the value of our economy.

Not forgetting that money spent and earned here goes around and around and keeps getting skimmed by taxes here so in the end it all goes back to where it started, but as it went around in circles it was someones wgaes, someones bonus and someones taxes.. all part of our gdp. the faster the money goeas around the more times it can be counted. Where as when that money goes abroad that is it game over.

The key factor that Lewis really should be writing about is where the money goes, because if the the powers that be decide to spend more with a company with British in the name but in reality said company is just a front for a US arms behemoth, and the money is really just being loaded on a ship and sailed away then the powers that be have really fucked up, and will be deserving of whatever comes their way.

Keeping British workers employed by British defence budgets is not such a bad thing. Even if it 'looks' like a more expensive aircraft on paper.

Wager placed. 1 Pint icon seems apt.

Typos & Journalistic Errors.

Shall we take that quote from the original source:

"The key to this breakthrough is Nocera's recent discovery of several powerful new, inexpensive catalysts, made of nickel and cobalt, that are capable of efficiently splitting water into its two components, hydrogen and oxygen, under simple conditions. Right now, Nocera's leaf is about 10 times more efficient at carrying out photosynthesis than a natural leaf. However, he is optimistic that he can boost the efficiency of the artificial leaf much higher in the future. "

(http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2011-03/acs-dot031811.php#)

Note the lack of the word electrolyse, since in this case it is wrong. The word that should have been used is 'Photolsye' since the energy is being provided in the form of photons not electrons. So this is NOT electrolysis, no matter what the article states.

The general reaction of photosynthetic photolysis can be given as:

[H2X] + [2 photons] --> [2e-] + [2H+] + [X]

The chemical nature of "X" depends on the type of reaction. Both H2O and H2S are photolysed in Nature.

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photodissociation#Photolysis_in_photosynthesis)

Whilst you are correct that a catalyst is not required to electrolyse water, This is not electrolysis.

It is also true that with very high levels of photons you can get Photodissociation of water without a catalyst but you are talking about the levels of light produced by say a Carbon Dioxide Laser. where two photons may simultainiously enter a reaction (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photodissociation#Multiple_photon_dissociation)

But where the level of light/photons is such that only one photon will enter the reaction at any time a catalyst MUST be used. And in this case a catalyst was used!

A catalyst is not inert in a reaction, it provides a middle phase of a reaction, in this case that middle phase is after one photon is absorbed, the second photon completes the reaction and returns the catalyst. Water dissociation is not possible with just one photon.

So going back to equations the overall excluding the catalyst should be as follows:

2[H2O] + 4[photons] --> [Photolysis Eq] --> 2[H2] + [O2] --> [Fuel Cell Eq] --> 2[H2O] + 4[e-]

Giving the key result: photons in electrons out.

Damn you!

must try harder...

No your not I am..

Oh... Errr... no... apparently I'm not..

Volumetric Verses Gravimetric

Possibly because weight is the limiting factor here not Volume.

Liquid H2 is 10MJ/Litre And 120MJ/Kg

Gasoline is 35MJ/Litre but is only 45MJ/Kg

And if you can swap to a very high efficency Fuel Cell in a year or two then your on to a real winner.

Mr Gumby, you are seriously in need. MkII

Oh Im sorry has me extended reading confused you. Twitter managed to get the subpoena unsealed because it actually IS that of an MP. If it were someone pretending to be the queen the subpoena would have remained sealed, and none of us would know about it.

The subpoenea was not restricted to the identity, and is for ALL the data of an MP, hence twitters ability/actions to request unsealing of the subpeona and allow a legal protest. My point is that the protest may be more than legal and could/should be a diplomatic issue.

does that make it more clear? Do I get it yet?

re: Twitter is public you muppet

Except for the DM part. which is supposedly private (requires username and passwords) unless someone subpoenas it.

Verified by visa

is a complete waste of time.. and too easy to scam. afterall the verified box only appears after you have keyed in your card number... so it offers no protection of the number at all. and I never remeber the stupid codes for it, so have to reset it every time... which is far too easy!

and if the scammer is operating a man in the middle style scam then you dont see vbyv you see an identical passthrough so they can take you vbyv password too.

The authentication process must be independant of whichever website that you might be using and email or mobile app as suggested above is the best way to do that.

Proof...

if it were needed that eyes see only wavelengths (as three discreet bands defined by the three types of cones in the retina - RGB wavelengths only) and the brain sees colour. In reality colour just does not exist. as a result its assumed that everyones perception of colour is actually different, but as only you see your perception it is impossible to know for sure!

DPI at the router.

Nice idea could work, but what speed processor are you willing to pay for?

L - A - T - E - N - C - Y

security woes

Thats what wikileaks is for, Publish the correspondance.

anyhoo a job that is not done properly is not worth doing. If you are asked to build a house you should always start with the foundations, you do not just build a house on the bare ground. I have to say its your fail, for just doing "what you are told" not what everyone (including those people whose data is at risk) expects of you. If you are going to do systems work do it properly.