Saxony used to have Uranium mines (see the Wismut page in Wikipedia). So are you sure it is Chernobyl radiation or just runoff from underground rivers that cross the uranium deposits that occur naturally over there?
Since in the n-tv article, they mention both Saxony AND Bavaria, I don't think it's from the uranium deposits.
In Germany, even this year, 40% of the wild boars which were tested in Saxony (hunters are required to check animals they killed for radioactivity) showed radioactivity higher than the limit of 600 becquerel/kg, which made them officially unsuitable for human consumption. Some animals even showed radioactivity as high as 9800 becquerel/kg. Articles (in German) here: http://www.neues-deutschland.d... and here: http://www.n-tv.de/wissen/Wild...
This radioactivity in the meat is caused by the boars eating mushrooms and other plants in the forest. If plants and animals in eastern Germany are still contaminated after all this time, I'd rather not eat anything from directly next to the chernobyl plant, or live there.
Also - couldn't you actually just sign the drivers that are needed for trim? What prevents that?
As the author of the popular "trim enabler" software (which patches the original apple drivers and so causes the original drivers to fail the kext signing check) puts it:
"all of Apple’s AHCI SATA drivers are closed source and undocumented, which makes it impossible for me to create my own Trim driver and get it signed."
Which is also the reason why there are no trim drivers available from hardware manufacturers like Samsung, etc. No access to Apple's driver documentation - no signed trim drivers.
It is amazing how ESA continues to have spectacular failures project after project. They manage to reach the target just to fail miserably due to lack of testing or by ignoring basic configurations.
I fail to see how "all the experiments on board the lander had a chance to run and return information back to Earth" (from LA times article) makes this mission a failure. Philae did everything they wanted it to do, the "charge battery and stay in contact" was just an optional extra.
Considering the official statement was that just LANDING there had only a 50:50 chance of succeeding, this whole thing was an incredible success.
Perhaps there's a Zoology Masters research project in working out ways to keep birds (and bats) away from the turbines.
Dead birds -> biomass -> energy. Sounds like an added bonus to me
More serious reply: According to an article on the website of German magazine "Focus" http://www.focus.de/wissen/kli... the bird observatory Brandenburg has a database of all recorded cases of birds killed by wind turbines in Germany. Since 1989, there have been 681 dead birds on record. Other researchers more critical of wind turbines estimate that by far not all dead birds are found, though, due to other animals eating them, the birds not dying right next to the wind turbine etc. and so they think the real number is more like 10000 to 100000 birds killed by wind turbines per year - which still would mean only about 1-5 dead birds for each of the 20000 wind turbines in Germany, per year. That does not sound TOO horrible to me.
In fact, someone on the Phoronix forums posted a bunch of links to Joey's debian-devel posts which seems to bear this out.
Especially the first one is a clanger. If you can't support systemd on technical grounds without getting threats, something is very toxic indeed.
And no, that first post is not directly related to the Debian Constitution. That the idiotic GR trying to override the Technical Committee decision two weeks before the Jessie freeze is inspired by this kind of drivel, and that the Constitution makes these kind of purely political overrides of the technical decisions possible is rather evident though.
From what I read there, stuff like https://lists.debian.org/debia... (trying to make technical decisions via politics when there actually is no disagreement between devs which needs any help with the decision-making) also contributed to his decision to quit.
Nope, I actually was surprised about this a couple times, too. For example, on the German amazon website, there are quite a few sellers which offer cheap 1-2 euro stuff (like e.g. USB adapters, ink cartridges for pens,
Because I don't want to be the weird guy who insists using e-mail for communications. I would just be an endurance to everyone.
Funny. In my circle of friends, anybody who would insist on communicating only via Facebook would be the "weird guy" (actually, as far as I know, most of them do not even have a Facebook account, specifically because of privacy concerns). We communicate via e-mail, or, if we need to talk to someone Right Now, via telephone. It works, try it.
and also, this https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
We have never put, nor returned, a man, to or from, the moon. And we are not the only ones to have faked space exploration. We did not have the technology to do it then, much like we don't now.
All three videos you posted just regurgigate the same old hoax arguments which have been debunked countless times. For good examples of the debunking, just go to e.g. http://www.clavius.org/index.h... or watch any of the videos (on youtube) by e.g. Phil Plait / astrobrant2 / GreaterSapien (or any of the countless others). Don't even mention Jarrah White, watch the astrobrant2 videos for debunking of his crazy theories.
Also good: Neil deGrasse Tyson discusses (among other stuff) the moon landing hoax with Joe Rogan: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...
Whenever people talk about "the fake moon landing", I like to point them to one of the many youtube videos which explain how DIFFICULT it would have been to fake the moon landing, like this one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v... It actually would have been easier to just send people to the moon instead of faking it.
Looks like it only 40 parts (including engine, electronics, etc). The video of driving car is only 40 parts. Did you see they printed most of the car in one pass as a single part?
So you say a car engine is made out of only 40 parts? Looked like more parts to me last time I looked under the hood of my car.
No, 700 miles is pretty close. 850 would be more closer though, it's about 1300 km.
Nope, indeed Dresden IS about 15000 miles or so EAST of Chernobyl. And about 800 miles WEST of it.
I really wouldn't want E-mail deleted while I'm out of office. Just the fact that I would have to ask everyone who E-mailed me to resend.
The expectation is that the sender reads the automatic reply, which says something like "X is on vacation and cannot be reached, so your mail will be deleted. If it was about something important, please mail Y". So you should not have to ask people to resend the mail, because they either wait for you to come back, or send a mail to your colleagues who are not on vacation (and if it is was something private like "want to go see a movie tonight?", people surely know your private email/phone number, too).
I've never interpreted these auto-replies to mean that I shouldn't send mail to that address. I thought they're just courtesy replies from a robot explaining that it'll be a long time before anyone reads it.
Deleting the email seems like a bad idea. That'll keep the recipient from being able to read it when they return.
And WTF does this have to do with overtime?
In theory you could just let the emails sit there until you are back at work, but in practice sadly it is often expected that you check your email inbox every now and then. Employees often feel that they can't say "no" to the expectation that they have to be available via email even while at home off work hours. To protect employees (because vacations and off work time are to be protected, for health reasons), there are discussions in Europe about introducing new regulations which would make any such "off work work" paid overtime, by law - effectively making it financially interesting for companies to prevent emails from reaching their employees when they are off work. This Daimler story is just one example of that.
Then why do all the TVs over 50 inches include it?
Included =/= being used. My TV is 3D capable, yet I never use that feature, because I consider it to be a gimmick. If there had been a cheaper version of my TV without 3D capability, I would have bought that one (same for all the "smart TV" Internet features, btw - all I want is a huge display with a couple HDMI inputs...). Sadly, that option did not exist. My totally unscientific research among friends/relatives shows that if they have a 3D TV, at most it has been used for one or two 3D movies like Ice Age "for the kids" to try it out, and that's it.
I program, therefore I am.
