Re: Good luck
I'll get your coat.
"You have already activated this jacket the maximum of five times. Please purchase a new jacket, or log onto itunes and deactivate an existing installation before...."
1609 publicly visible posts • joined 24 May 2011
If you forget or refuse to pay a parking ticket, you might find the subsequent admin and penalty fees can equal or exceed the original amount. Forget/refuse again, and expect even bigger penalties.
Admittedly the decimal point moved a few places along the fee figure, but MS is equally is guilty - it got a fine, and "forgot" to pay that fine. So it got penalised. If it forgets again, the next figure will be even larger.
It's all a very simple concept...even if the scale of the figures are considerably larger. Not really a big deal.
However, it is going to be funny seeing how ineffective a popup box will be, given how much the market (and browser shares) have moved on since the original judgement.
Re. the amount - IIRC this was decided via a complicated equation involving % market share, MS' declared EU turnover and approximate losses incurred by competitors since the monopoly was established. Though I'm sure the judges will say that's what they did...they probably actually did the "finger-in-the-air-then-double-it" estimation.
Thank you Larry - my downvoters be aware - contactless does not always mean that, nor does it mean germ-free, what with sweat evaporation and air flow. it just needs close proximity. See also telephone microphone speakers - you don't touch that (merely breathe on it), but it's germ heaven.
if done poorly, a severed hand would not contain blood, so most vessels would be empty, and thus thinner than expected. Or perhaps it's simply looking for body temperature.
You would need to kill the victim via poison (puncture wounds may cause excess blood loss), then sever the hand fingers down. Then flash freeze to ensure the veins are frozen in their "open" state. For use, it will be thawed, then you would need to transport the hand fingers down, and perhaps with a wax seal over the stump. You would then need to microwave it back to *exactly* body temperature a few seconds before scanning.
Next disturbing thought exercise please...
As with all things Biometric..there's a problem...
The man in front of your at the same airport boarding gate does one or all of the following:
- Has bird flu, and sneezes into hand
- "re-arranges" himself
- picks his nose
- picks his arse
- puts his hand on the scanner to board
...would you put your hand on the same scanner immediately after him? Would you be entitled to ask for a disinfected scanner first, or a backup boarding identification method?
FFS...more rumours...
I'm surprised nobody has gone the whole hog and come up with "Apple rumour trifecta". eg:
"Apple's new 5S will automagically syncronise music and apps with iwatch via bluetooth 5, and enable you to take facetime and skype calls using your Apple TV, while simultanously streaming 2K content from your iTV gen 5."
There. Now *that's* a rumour.
What's slightly annoying is that the ethical concerns were that the effects *permanently* modified a patients behaviour or personality (even after refinement of the process, there was still overspill into other parts of the brain), even when the evidence was it was only temporary and only lasted as long as stimulation occured.
eg: http://www.macalester.edu/psychology/whathap/UBNRP/tle09/artificial_stim2.html
The process - IMO - is sound, but it's very much a sledgehammer to crack a nut, and the overspill causes the alarming (in the publics eyes) side effects. Much more refinement and accuracy is required.
Edit: Note - link is for TLE only.
to help produce better computer models of the brain
ok, so how does that work? How do you model one system onto another completely incompatible one?
ie:
Brain - extremely slow (19-15hz), massively parallel, "analogue", self-repairing and self-adapting, poor compartmentalisation, with pattern detection bias and high error ratio
Computer - extremely fast, not very parallel, "digital", strict compartmentalisation with bit level processing bias and low error ratio.
Oh yes - nearly forgot...
"the wind assistance of passing traffic"
WTF ?
Yep - it's true. Ask any competitive roadie if you like - there is a definite effect. The fact that some of the fastest Time Trial courses use busy roads is no coincidence.
And re: 500watts...yes, that pretty close. However, aerodynamics are crucial here. At that speed you won't be sitting bolt upright like Mary Poppins...Think closer to 350watts with traffic assist, which most amateur riders can hold for extended periods.
Cyclists think they're precious little jewels who don't need to follow the same rules as everyone else (like coughing up money or obeying the rules of the road) and throw a hissy fit if you hold them to the same standards they hold others
Whereas car owners who think they're better than everything else on the road is ok is it? And that all other road users are inferior or that rulings and amenities to provide safety to other road users is somehow a discrimination against them? Well, well...
It should be noted, I despise the red light and pavement riders as well. Really doesn''t do the image of cyclists any favours. And i'm a cyclist!
I'm a cyclist and a car driver (as most are btw Mr Troll), and I have the following suggestion.
To save having to listen to the ill educated whiners going on about "oh cyclists don't pay tax"...I propose that VED version 1.0 is scrapped, and VED version 2.0 taxes applied to all road using vehicles, based on the vehicle's kerb weight x by the number of wheels (as weight is what damages roads).
2.5p per kilo is about right. So a 1,200kg car will pay around the same as now - £120. A 3.5t van...£525.
So my 8kg bike will pay...40p. It's a fair cop. Apart from the bit where it will probably cost the Government at least £1 to process every application and it's payment...
And that's not to mention the CO2 produced by people having sex.....
It's worse than that. If the sex results in pregnancy it means elevated metabolic requirements for 9 months, followed by an additional and parrallel aerobic system being started, which is likely to be constantly producing CO2 for another 85 years afterwards.
So much, much worse than cycling. Time for Dr Breen's supression field, methinks...
I'm not sure I'd manage a steady 35km/h - I'm probably ambling making about 15km/h through the city. Maybe you are wasted in front of computer and a career in cycle couriership might be beckoning.
Actually, that's only < 22mph. With flat roads and the wind assistance of passing traffic, this is easily achievable with a modicum of effort. With a bit of training on a road bike/"racer", 27-28mph is perfectly possible to maintain on more open sections.
One might ask why you're going so slow...
a) Cyclists are not allowed on Freeways (assuming US)
b) Even a cyclist mental enough to do this, Freeways have hard shoulders. They would not ride in the traffic unless they wanted to die
c) Freeways are 2 lanes wide and fast, and if you're approaching at your 120kph, the last thing you would be doing is slowing down to follow a cyclist. If you are, please - walk - to the nearest Police station and hand in your licence.
Road maintaince is paid for out of Council tax, or through specific tolls (See Dartford, and formally, the Forth bridge)
Road projects are paid to agencies/contractors out of Central gov, using a number of pots, including - by virtue of being a percentage point therein - VED. Or 100% privately, with the right to reclaim costs through specific tolls.
So much fail here...
- In a 30mph/50kph limit, you will not be in top anyway - likely 4th or even 3rd. Nor will you be cruising at a constant speed. In town you have junctions, lights, bus stops, pedestrian crossing etc. Frankly cyclists are the least of your worries.
- In town (it's been proven in London many times) that cycling is faster than driving. I'm an "above average" cyclist, and I get held up by cars.
- Public roads are funded through council taxes, not VED. So unless all cyclists are homeless, they pay. They are also subject to normal road rules, and if they have a driving licence can even accumulate tickets and points (in theory...but rarely in practise).
- Your car only does 8.5 in ideal conditions. That's a gas guzzler. I'd hardly be quibling about 25% if I was you - if you can afford to feed it, you're paying your dues.
Errr...not quite (see my post above). Being a cyclist, I'd love to believe this too, but there are a couple of snags:
- One of the biggest consumer of fossil fuel is agriculture, both in processing, transport and fertilizers. Yes, the end product is "carbon neutral", but the processing is not.
- Also, a lot of our food is flown in. Bananas from Brazil, Lamb from New Zealand, Strawberries from South Africa. This is done - very inefficiently - via fossil fuel.
- Some of our food products (cows, mainly) product a lot of methane.This is a far more potent greenhouse gas than plain ol' CO2.
Until we go 100% organic, using solar-powered electric tractors, and we only eat stuff harvested within a 10 mile radius, "our" food source will not be carbon neutral.
Ok, steady on chaps...
Lets factor in the fuel source as well. I think you'll find the amount of energy require to process and transport fuel from the middle east, is far more than plucking and eating an apple off a tree in Yorkshire. Even high energy meat produce is more efficient.
And lets not forget..."our" fuel is "carbon neutral", as it's grown organically, whereas fossil fuels is net contributor to the CO2 level. Errrr....well...mostly...if we ignore the amount that is converted to methane which is factor more dangerous greenhouse gas...and the agro-chemical fertilizers and our tractors are mostly based and run on hydrocarbons...and that we do stupid things like fly bananas over from Brazil...
Finally lets not forget that in most towns, bikes are actually faster than cars, and the biggest restriction for cars in towns are junctions and traffic lights, rather than cyclists. I'm an "above average" cyclist, and I actually find the cars are the ones holding me up. But regardless - tony's solutions is correct - make our cycle lanes better! Please!
Indeed...except the amount of energy it takes to move heavy objects, it's well known that fat people's aerobic systems have to work harder than you'd expect. I think the fattest man in britain's resting heart rate is 130bpm, or something mental like that.
So tax fat people! Oh wait...they already plan to do that...
Or he thought:
"This is so crap, it's going to have to go straight to DVD. Or wait - if I launched it as online only, will that give it the credibility it desperately needs, while simultanously giving me access to a potentially wider audience without the overhead of burning CD's...?"
Overheard in the work canteen: "why does it take so long to dock? You can dock a cross-channel ferry in under 10 minutes and it's much bigger!"
When *everything* costs 10-100x more yet far more fragile than a cross channel ferry, is flying round in a much more hostile environment where "drag" does not exist, it pays to be *super careful*.
Ok, as I see it:
- Ipads are not light
- ergo, the internal magnets needed to support it's weight in some of these scenarios need to be substantial
- ...adding yet more weight
- and making the "remove with ease" statement a bit of a falacy
- possibly causing secondary issues; the internal magnets *may* interfere with other electronics (eg, if stored in same bag as a laptop).
Actually, I understood it fully. But maybe I could have made my point clearer.
Given the meagre 3-8% reduction in size, the disproportionate increase in CPU (and thus battery life) to obtain it will not mean any significant advantage for the consumer,
It might make the carriers happy but even then, 3% (even if *every* device used this new algo), will hardly dent their year-on-year data increases, and 8% probably only works on specific scenarios.
The consumer will hardly notice the benefit on local storage, given the "growth" of the phone's OS and application footprints will probably wipe out any benefits there.
So given the real world useage, chances are, all the user will see is a massive increase in battery drain, with no real benefit, in *either* local storage or improved data transmission performance.
Far better to improve security on the devices, as this will have immediate benefits to the consumer, given it's likely the smartphone will become a significant attack vector for hackers in the coming years. Preferably one with minimum CPU requirements.