Not all gallons are the same. Muros must have thought this was obvious. I thought it was obvious.
If two people independently read the same meaning in a message you've written, it's unlikely the problem is with the reader.
Only true with a small audience. When read by thousands, the two that could not figure it out are to blame.
I have a Leaf, there is no radiator of any kind. Heat comes from resistance (pre 2013) or heat pump (2013 and beyond).
Heat pumps still require radiators. They are much simpler and less maintenance then a typical automotive radiator - but they are still there. Just look at the back / bottom of your refrigerator for an example.
The solution is to build / install multiple mini-towers to replace large towers covering a larger area.
Dialling down the transmit power of both the device and tower will reduce the congestion. With fewer devices on each tower, bandwidth will increase. Also, devices will require less transmit and receive power so their batteries will last longer. And when in a more rural setting with fewer devices, service providers can still go with a larger tower to cover more area.
This is the only real solution but it requires an investment in infrastructure. From the perspective of a service provider, it is far more cost effective to convince the government to give / sell them more bandwidth. Regardless of how much bandwidth they have, they will always be begging government for more.
No, I can't agree with that. You can't force the proprietor of the business to do anything the customer wants. Let's say the baker's kid just died, is it okay for a customer to demand that the baker ice the cake saying something nasty about the dead kid? It's freedom of speech, right?
Sorry, but your analogy is horribly flawed. I do not think anyone is claiming that business owners have to serve jerks. It is only a issue when a business refuses to perform a service that they would otherwise perform based solely on the sexual orientation of the customer. With the bakery, it was only a problem because the baker would gladly draw genitalia for straight customers - but not a gay couple.
Unless you are, you know, wearing no shirt or no shoes. Then it's OK for a public business to discriminate.
Sexual orientation is not a choice but one's attire is.
Exactly, the Olympics has turned into yet another pointless profit driven media frenzy. It's not even about the athletes anymore.
You're wrong about that. It has not turned - it was never that way in the first place.
The Olympics is a huge money-making business where they do not have to build their own facilities (host Countries/taxpayers do that) nor do they have to pay their athletes. They stoke the flames of patriotism to get people interested then sell them the rights to watch the event. It's the ultimate low risk, high income business to be in - and there is no competition.
I am not a fan of professional sports but at least the NFL/NHL/NBA etc. pay their way. Their athletes are well paid and they do not burden the host cities with the cost of their facilities - generally speaking. But the Olympics rub me the wrong way. If they did something positive with the billions they get for media distribution rights it would be different but they just pocket the money.
This will only work on a few people. When I google myself, William Douglas, I get a pile of hits and none of them are for me. Additionally, people can still change their name if they want to distance themselves from their past. Will not hide you from government agencies but will be good enough for everyone else.
On a side note, a question to the grammar Nazis. When using the word "Google" as a verb, should the first character be capitalized? And as a website that supposedly stays neutral, should it even be used as a verb within headlines?
Now if you would please forgive me, I must go monitor Bing to see if their is a sudden spike in searches for "William Douglas".
Since using X applications on Mac OS X did not work seamless at all, that statement is not very reassuring to me
You can't expect a program written for X11 to be seamless on another operating system. To integrate properly one would have to get the X11 app to respond to native keyboard shortcuts, integrate drag-and-drop, have knowledge of the host file system. The list goes on but my point is that an X11 app will remain an X11 app even if run on a Mac/Win host. One can not expect a seamless experience.
But things are different for Wayland. All of the previously mentioned problems will not impact Wayland in the slightest. It is reasonable to assume that the user experience will be seamless.
QtOctave is not an integrated GUI for Octave - it's more of a graphically enhanced command line interface. It looks great on the surface but fails to have any depth. I don't mean to fault the QtOctave project - limitations in Octave are what prevented it from working well. From what I've read, Octave has been undergoing changes for the past two years in order to restructure it in such a way that it can work well with a GUI.
The situation is similar to GCC. GCC does not integrate will with IDEs - sort of but not really. The CLANG project solves these problems because it was designed to be more modular and facitlitate interacting with other programs and not just the command line. CLANG based IDEs have better support for highlighted code, variable highlightling, and anything else where the GUI needs to perform a task typically done by the compiler.
I only bring up GCC and CLANG because their differences help explain why the old Octave and QtOctave could never provide a good, integrated GUI. Sounds like Octave has changed to be more like CLANG so we can now expect improvements to the stagnant QtOctave. Only the design changes to Octave are so great that it is simpler to start a new project then modify QtOctave.
F-150s tend to be grocery getters
Yes - this is exactly right. F-150s are almost always used as glorified cars so the benefits of reduced weight are much higher then for other models. Anyone purchasing a work truck who plans on towing or hauling is much better suited with an diesel F-350.
Interesting tidbit; in Canada (not sure about the US) a 1 tonne pickup is considered a work truck where as a 3/4 tonne is considered an expensive toy and is levied with a luxury tax. So while a F-350 is more expensive then a F-250, the difference is minimal and the F-350 is a better bargain. As a result you see lots of F-150s and F-350s but not so many F-250s.
When, as a kid, I first took an interest in computers, 300dpi laser printers were all the rage. Now they boast around 2400dpi. No one seems to complain that images and text are sharper. Now displays and the printed page may be different but one certainly doesn't generally hold a piece of paper 2 feet away to read a book.
Displays and the printed page are too different to compare - so why bring it up? If anything, you just provided another example that agrees with the GP's post. At 300dpi, laser printers print almost perfect text and increasing to 2400dpi does almost nothing for plain text. If it was not for printing graphics, the increase would be pointless.
When it comes to high resolution displays, so long as they continue to use more power then the lower resolution models, users will complain. When additional GPU hardware is required with no visible improvement - users will again complain.
They say engineering is the art of compromise. High resolution displays require one to compromise on battery life and purchase price (GPU) so there is a limit as to what is practical. At a certain point the higher resolution becomes nothing more then a marketing gimmick.
"Protozoa are small, and bacteria are small, but viruses are smaller than the both put together."
