Comment Re:Not surprising at all (Score 1) 67
What correlation? There's just some tech writer who can't do basic math talking about "heartbeat coordination, like in ET."
What correlation? There's just some tech writer who can't do basic math talking about "heartbeat coordination, like in ET."
#2 doesn't make sense. The EM drive in all of it's tested and theorized forms uses a lot more energy than you could harvest from the motion it produces.
Noether's theorem doesn't "fall." In this context it says (roughly) that if the laws of physics are the same in all places then linear momentum is conserved. We believe that the laws of physics don't vary with position, but they could.
Also, there are various explanations for how the drive could work without violating conservation of momentum. They require some other interesting violations of things we currently believe to be true, but aren't necessarily.
For outer system stuff you'd use a nuke.
"Fuel" in terms of energy isn't the problem in a rocket. The problem is the requirement to haul around reaction mass: stuff to throw out the back. If you don't need to do that, the tyranny of the rocket equation goes away and space travel suddenly becomes a much different proposition.
Pathogens don't "learn". They evolve, ok. They adapt, ok. But they aren't sentient. They are not thinking. And especially they aren't thinking "hey, if they vaccinate, they won't die anyway, at least not as fast, so let's get more deadly!" This isn't the fucking Pandemic flash game for crying out loud!
There is no interest of killing a host for a parasite. It's an side effect. Unintended, and actually harmful for the parasite in the long run. Just like poisoning the seas is harmful for us. We ain't some comic book villain who does it for
So yes, they COULD get more deadly because we don't die as fast and a more deadly mutated strain would kill itself off with the host if there was no vaccination. But that is hardly an argument against vaccination. It only means that at worst we're with vaccination where we are now without. AT WORST. If, and only if, the pathogens mutate in such a way that they get more deadly. Which is neither in their interest nor anything they would (evolutionary) strive for.
What's the benefit for a pathogen to be more deadly? Killing the host is actually bad for it, since that ends spreading (with this host at least).
I can dissolve that conspiracy theory: They are more afraid of someone finding a way to bypass their input sanitizers than losing money from hacks. So no characters are allowed that could possibly, remotely, be considered "active" or "command" characters in any language they could probably think of.
Also, most, if not all, of the hacks happen due to people getting their passwords stolen by trojans and the like rather than someone actually guessing the passwords.
Provided that we now know how your passwords are created, finding your password is essentially not harder or easier than before. From a technical point of view of course. Actually, it probably is much easier now considering that, since you probably rely on your creation algorithm to introduce enough entropy, you probably choose simpler passwords.
Given that most of these webpages are also the ones where you have to answer some "secret" question to recover your password, it's kinda moot to select a secure password.
What is it you say? "Instead of giving a real answer to the "secret" question, simply use another randomly generated string?"
That's a good idea. Until the admin of the page locks your account because "you obviously are a robot, because humans don't do this".
The problem runs far, far deeper, people...
have a feature that "types" your password in the box instead of having to copy paste it.
Problem -> solved.
My point was just those features make quickie editing even quicker - your Amazon script is
var el = document.querySelector('#summaryStars,
.totalReviewCount'), total = parseInt(el && el.textContent) if (total) {
Array.from(document.querySelectorAll('#histogramTable td:last-child a')), a => {
var num = parseInt(a.textContent), pct = 100 * (num / total)
a.innerHTML = `${num} - <b>${pct.toFixed(0)}%</b>`
})
}
and about two dozen of my scripts are variations on this
There are a lot of annoying websites out there lol, hope this comes in handy next time one just needs that little fix...
It would be interesting what kind of money such a fundraiser can collect. Somehow I can see this getting a LOT of money.
I do have a lot of respect for the women (and men, let's not forget them) who provide a valuable service by selling professional aid in the area of satisfying one of the most powerful human urges.
But these people I'd certainly call prostitutes. Or maybe, if I have to skirt the issue, a "working girl/guy".
I would never dream of calling someone who actually has a decent job and provides a valuable service a hoe or a whore!
"I have here your son. He can be alive tomorrow provided you..."
That kind?
Wasn't Win10 the system where you can't turn off updates? Now, how does that work out for you?
Yes, but we ain't living in a perfect world and politicians as well as officials who should work for taxes deliberately choose to be whores and sell themselves to the highest bidder. So ok, I can't change the game so I want in. How much? How much is the whore? How much for a law? How much to actually get it executed? How much to get a law bent and turned inside out to use it against its intent?
Apparently these hoes are for sale, so what's left to be determined is the price.
"The one charm of marriage is that it makes a life of deception a neccessity." - Oscar Wilde