Just a note on usage: an "in-state flight" is known as an "intra-state flight". What you're thinking of, where the federal government regulated things, is and "inter-state flight". "intra" means "within"; "inter" means "across multiple" (sorta; I'm hard-pressed to come up with a better short definition).

What you wrote disagrees with itself, because "in-state" is the same as "intra-state". Nonetheless, I'm sure we all understood what you meant.

Newsflash: whooosh!!

Check your sarcasm detector, as it seems to be completely broken.

Woosh.

He's pointing out that the 4 letter acronym OTOH (On The Other Hand) wasn't spelled out.

I had no idea we were already living in a Rush album.

Try 512 AD.

I think your showing more issues with Word than with ePub.

That you manged to get Word to print your document in a way that "looked great" is amazing. It's even more amazing if the formatting managed to stick after an edit. Personally, having written a number of reasonably long technical documents in Word, I've found that it usually manages to screw up somewhere along the way, with mysterious refusal to break a line (or not break a line, or apply a style) somewhere, and the only way to fix it is to move the text elsewhere, delete it, and copy it back, and then apply formatting again. When I can, I avoid Word, because it sucks.

So if 1/3 show a decline, and 2/3 show an increase, isn't there just a smidge of a possibility that the overall average is going up? (It's not a gurantee, obviously; if the increases are small and the declines are large the overall number would be down.)

Climate models aren't intended to explain the local variations; they're there for the big picture.

The cagey way you phrase this makes this a likely troll. The climate folks have looked at all the numbers and concluded that, overall, temperatures are increasing. Yes, some local temperatures are declining. You yourself admit it's even a minority of local temperatures. That you try to turn it into some sort of accusation is trolling.

While that SOUNDS nice, the performance would be atrocious. As another reply points out, this has been done, but no one uses it. The reason, I'd bet, is that round-trip times kill you.

One call is pretty fast. But once you're querying a significant part of the DOM to get some values, all those round-trip times add up. This is the same issue that makes X slow over a WAN (not unusably slow, just annoyingly slow): X has synchronous requests and responses; you can't make the next request until the response comes back, and even fast pings on a real network are measured in tens on milliseconds. That adds up to a second with just a hundred calls.

You need a higher-level protocol. One where all the presentation can be sent at once, and painted on the screen. Once it's there, we can get all the data, and send up actions that manipulate the data. With little scripts to do immediate validation already running locally, sent down as part of the initial presentation. (This sounds familiar, somehow.)

Or you could try for asynchronous. Send up a bunch of requests at once, and get all the responses back at once. Then round-trips don't kill you. The problem there is that all too often the data you want depends on the result of the previous request. You could shoot down a whole program that collects what you want and sends it back....

Those things are all true, except the last (and only with a contrafactual assumption there). If it were the case that Coke did not, in fact, have high-fructose corn syrup in it, then they could complain about your picture of Coke. Just because it is a soft drink, and popular, doesn't give you the right to print a picture of the trademarked Coke logo when that has nothing to do with the story. (In the real world, Coke is full of HFCS, and it would be fine.)

In this case, the NYSE has nothing to do with the insider trading (apparently), and they don't want to be associated with the story, and that means they can use their trademark on their "image" to prevent it being tied to a story that isn't about them.

It's as if a story about pedophiles in our midst were illustrated with pictures of you playing with your kids. Sure, the story never claimed you were a pedophile; it never mentioned you at all. Yet the presence of your image there would cause an association you would certainly not like, and you would for damn sure use whatever legal basis you had to get your pictures off of there.

You realize they are talking about the case color, not the display capabilities. The screen is a standard color screen.

That's the third law of Slashdot.

Whooosh!

That's the sound of the cold air from my air conditioner.

Yes it is!

The rock had a good agent...

It's USB.