I'm wearing a 1956 manual wind Longines. I'm pretty sure it cannot "compute" anything.

I'm a Christian. It seems reasonable to me that the current thinking of the age of the universe (~14 billion years) and the earth (~4 billion years) is correct. It seems reasonable to me that the evolutionary theory is at least mostly correct. I believe God created everything, and this does not contradict the prior statements.

I really dislike young earth creationists expounding their views publicly. It gives people the false impression that one cannot be a Christian without thinking the Earth is 6017 years old, or whatever figure they're on these days.

That's not the point. Just as Pope Francis has recently expounded that the Catholics should concentrate on the love, mercy and salvation aspects of the Gospels rather than the continual harping on about homosexuality, birth control and abortion, so Christians in general should concentrate on the key message rather than getting swept up in an argument that is more likely to turn people away.

Sure, if you want to believe an alternate view of the age of the stuff around you, go for it, but please don't condemn others to missing out on their salvation by your stubborness.

Rant over. The Lord bless you and keep you all. :)

Interestingly, polythene (e.g. cling film) neutralizes the TCA molecules in corked wine...

Tracking down radio-frequency sources, especially low-altitude, low-power, mobile transmitters, is not so easy. Just look at the equipment and infrastructure used by the British to track the RF signal emitted by TVs (for licensing fees/penalties)

They used gullibility, which is much cheaper. There never were any functional TV detector vans.

Of course a complete block would be impossible. What's needed is something like OpenDNS. I use it for my home network, with (in)appropriate categories blocked. This means it's far less likely the kids will stumble across (in a few years' time, read "successfully search for") anything we'd rather they didn't see.

The router acts as a DNS forwarder for OpenDNS's servers, and it blocks outgoing port 53 requests from machines on the LAN. This stops anyone configuring their own DNS server to get around my block.

This is by no means infallible: a proxy, a DNS server not on port 53, an external online IP address lookup - all of these will get around it. My intent is to reduce the likelihood of inappropriate material making it onto the LAN.

Faith never died. Its opponents just got noisier.

My TV is 720p native (well, 768) but supports 1080i. Despite the nerd in me wanting to prefer 720p for techie reasons, the picture is unquestionably better with 1080i input.

Heh, a Klein bottle. Cool.

I wonder if that was sent to try to trick the software. Inside?! Outside?!?!?! BOOOM!

...is still there as a white blob at various scales between Australia & New Caledonia...

It's a good job they're using old 32-bit hardware. A 64-bit int overflow would have resulted in an order for 18,446,744,073,709,551,610 futures. That's a lot.

You'd be surprised how many people run older hardware. I don't give a damn about gaming; so all three desktops and one of the two laptops in my house are old 32-bit machines (Athlons, Pentium 4 3.06GHz HT, Celeron in the lappy). They run apps just as fast as when they were new state-of-the-art machines - it seems daft that it's the window management that's forcing me to look for leaner distros. I'm certainly not going to spend money upgrading hardware to have prettier window decorations and physics.

You mean a water balloon?

It’s much worse than this. The burden of proof on people attempting to publish studies showing that work cannot be replicated is extremely high. Often many-fold more experiments and controls are required to show that it isn’t simply a failure on the part of the group attempting to repeat the experiment. Frequently these sorts of papers must offer an alternative hypothesis to explain both the original and new results as well. These sorts of studies are very difficult and time consuming, and can’t be given to junior graduate students who haven’t already proven themselves to be capable experimentalists. Thus to do something like this you need to assign one or more very capable senior students/postdoctoral workers, which costs money and time and takes away from original research.

You won't get an electric shock touching a conductor at 20V DC, so long as you don't put it on your mouth. The *power* output capability is irrelevant in its ability to shock you.

That is left as an exercise for the reader. Hint: keyboard.