I have an iPhone 5. When iOS 7 was released, the main features that pulled pep from my phone was the motion visual effect. Turning it off made a huge difference. Can be found under -Settings --> Accessibility --> Reduce Motion (ON). Hopefully the iOS performance hit is mainly video related so as to turn off whatever advance feature chews through cycles. If it's the kernel itself taxing the CPU, yeah, pretty much screwed.
I'd love to let them have the run of things for a while, except they insist on flying planes into our buildings and beheading children.
With that logic, we should go to war with our ally Saudi Arabia as well.
Saudi nationals have flown more planes into buildings than ISIS.
The Saudi Government has beheaded more people than ISIS.
(Though ISIS seems to be trying to catch up)
No, I think the only option is to go in and kill every last one of them, like the vermin infestation that they are.
The language of dehumanization is ugly.
I'm glad that Western governments have abandoned it as a propaganda tool.
I can only hope that some of the less evolved citizens of the West will abandon it as well.
Admiral Rogers, I know this is harder for you than it is for a civilian, but you've really gotta stop conflating "legal" with "ethical." And if you can't do that, I can sympathize, but could you at least stop conflating "legal" with "in the interests of the United States?"
You should read what he said again.
I try to remind people that the all judgement to date find that the NSA has abided by the law. We have not been found to attempt to undermine the law.
He didn't say that the NSA abides by the law, only that no court has judged them as acting illegally.
The NSA's warrantless wiretapping was nakedly illegal and unconstitutional, but so far (AFAIK) no Judge has taken a case to its conclusion.
And Congress passed the FISA Amendments Act of 2008 to retroactively shield the telecom companies for their participation.
The NSA has even admitted to "overcollection" under the 2008 law, but the details are classified, so no one can claim standing to sue.
The NSA knows they've repeatedly broken the law; what's impressive is the rearguard action they've maintained to prevent & delay legal action.
Okay, I'm not a Muslim, nor am I an expert. I've been over in majority Islamic countries a few times though and had a few 'cultural appreciation' lessons.
Isis is violating a good amount of Islamic teachings with this ban.
Though I can't see how they're still allowed to teach chemistry(even if they have to say it's due to Allah's rules and law) if they're not allowed to teach math, so it might be an error in the article. Math may have been de-emphasized against teaching their propaganda.
Sorry for the delay, but I find angel to have a compelling argument - in order to grow cows need nutrients. It's not just 'grow fat' or 'heavier', if they simply weighed more because they had 100 pounds of feed stopped up in them, the meat packing industry would be pissed and start buying on the basis of gutted carcass weight or something. In order to get said nutrients they need their gut bacteria to break down their food, otherwise it'd inedible to them. In a sense Cows digest the bacteria, not the plant matter they consume.
If there are 'bucket loads' of scientific studies, it shouldn't be hard to give a reputable source. I'll admit that I haven't studied the issue. I know there's weight gain when growing animals are given antibiotics. I know they'll maintain weight/growth if given less food along with antibiotics. Why? That's trickier.
For example, this report shouldn't be taken to heart because it's by a student, not curated or peer reviewed, but it's at least simple and lists more references. It says that the growth isn't because food processing is being disrupted, but because the animal isn't spending resources developing immune responses it otherwise would and that most of the bacteria effected are in the large intestine, which provides minimal nutrition extraction as opposed to the bacteria in the stomach and small intestine.
Also, 16% more growth on 7% less feed is significant, which is why a lot of pig farmers today are perfectly willing to give up on routine antibiotic regimes for pigs in other stages where it's much less effective, but want to keep it during the starter/weanling stage.
The Martin Mars can drop 600 gallons compared to the 12,000 gallons of the DC-10. It can do in one run what it would take a Martin Mars twenty runs to do. The article says the plane can travel from where it's based to most of it area it could respond to in just 45 minutes. Give another 45 minutes to return to its home base and say 5 minutes for the dump itself and you're look at 95 minutes RTT. If they can refill it in just 15 minutes that puts it at 110 minutes total time. Ignoring travel time to the site for the Martin Mars, it would need to make a water drop every 5.5 minutes in order to keep up with the DC-10. The one area that the Martin Mars has an advantage in is that since the dump is done all at once, the Martin Mars can more effectively respond over a wider area unless the DC-10 is configured in a way that lets it do a partial dump but considering these are typically used to help break the progress of the fire I don't think that's a huge advantage.
I wish both Scotland and England the best. This separation should be amicable. In fact, hopefully it give both countries strength in competition and to set examples for each other in both how and how not to govern.
Texas might not be far behind you.
If a route needed to be blackholed because of a DDOS, and that action had to be approved of by a central authority, which could take days to weeks for a ruling, nothing could be done because routers would not accept changes to any route until then.
Why would you need permission to blackhole a route?
The problem is adding good routes, not dropping bad ones.
Your claim that I am a 'terrible human being' noted. So what does that make you given the fact that your claim is based on my comment, which states that no human should be forced to be a slave to another human by anybody, especially by the violent power of the state?
What does that make you, a 'better' human being, to want to use the violent power of the state to force people to give up portion of their live involuntarily for any supposed benefit of anybody at all or for any reason whatsoever for that matter?
At the very minimum it makes your position extremely inconsistent within itself, claiming that being what you are a 'better' comparing to what I am, while declaring that people need to be forced by violence (that is what state is - violence), subjugated to the will of the collective and not be allowed to decide how to control their own lives?
Then again, no socialist ideas are consistent within themselves. The so called 'green' socialists are of the opinion that people are destroying the planet. They want to use the violent power of the state to subjugate the individuals, to turn their productivity to the state, so that the state would decide what to do with it, supposedly for the benefit of the environment somehow (while the worst damage to the environment comes from the operation of the state, nuclear disasters, wars, pollution). They do not see the inconsistency of their ideas at all. They want the state to control the resources, but obviously for the state to do so, it needs to throw bones to the subjects, the bones being subsidies.
So tax those, who are productive, steal their productivity (lives, time on this planet, creativity) and allow the state to subsidise others? How is that consistent with the 'green' ideology, which is of the opinion that human activities cause ecological problems on this planet? They would be consistent if they in fact decided to completely remove subsidies, we get more of what we subsidise.
Providing subsidies causes an influx in births, those who live on subsidies do not have to care as much how to provide for the offspring, their birth rates are higher. It is an inconsistent position to provide for more subsidies from those, who already control their own birth rates to those, who will not if given subsidies.
But of-course socialist positions are never consistent.
As a side note, I have formed my opinions on this matter over 30 years ago, I only read Ayn Rand's novels out of curiosity maybe 2 or 3 years ago, I don't need anybody to form my opinions for me, which is, by the way, why I am an individual, not an ant in a colony.
Did we have a recent article about missing lithium.... maybe this star is the culprit that stole it all.
Guns that shoot bees are better.
Further, multiplying this problem manyfold, is that when an SSD fails, it tends to fail totally.
I have seen this happen, but its not due to endurance of the flash cells but on the quality of the firmware / controller. The actual cell failures apparently cause reallocations (according to techreport's tests, and to common sense). And you create an interesting dichotomy; what does it look like for an SSD or HDD or CPU or RAM to fail "not totally"? You get most of your bits back? All tech generally tends to fail catastrophically.
Theres a lot of misconception here, so I'll try to address them.
Making assumptions about how often trim might be used for any given workload only obscures the actual write endurance.
TRIM has nothing to do with endurance. TRIM erases cells that are scheduled for erasure anyways; all TRIM does is try to time that erasure such that it occurs at a time that will not effect performance. What affects endurance is wear leveling, which is an entirely separate technique that does actually work. As capacity increases, wear-leveling ensures that the endurance of the drive as a total increases.
Much like a 100GB capacity tape that's marked as 200GB because dome data that the manufacturer chose compressed 2:1 before being sent to the tape drive. Your mpeg movies aren't going to compress, so you'll be able to put 100GB of movies on that 100GB tape. The 200GB number is pure marketing BS.
When tape manufacturers (or organizations, like the one behind LTO) cite a compression factor like 2:1, it is based on a standard body of data like the calgary corpus which includes both compressible and uncompressible data. This allows you to compare different technologies with different compression standards.
In the real world on LTO (which I assume you are referring to) I have seen compression factors ranging from ~1.5 to 2.5, so its not really accurate to call it marketing BS. They also always (as far as I have seen) mark the tapes something like "800GB/1600GB" with the subtext explaining that the smaller number is native, and that the entire thing is 2:1. Its not dishonest because the compression is part of the (well-defined) standard, and the native capacity is right next to the compressed capacity. Its also not the manufacturer doing this; those numbers are explicitly defined in the spec.
all if the companies use the same 2:1 bs factor,
Which begins to make sense when you realize that thats because LTO itself defines the compression factor of 2:1 based on calgary corpus.
There's no telling what assumptions Micron made about the use of trim
But, as we've established, TRIM has literally no effect on endurance, so its irrelevant what they might assume about it.
so there's no way to compare this drive's endurance to any other, or to estimate it's actual endurance for any real workload.
Not to be harsh, but there is if you actually took the time to understand the tech. They usually do provide endurance stats (ie, "100PB data endurance") and tests by Anandtech and others have often validated that as being realistic.
I prefer my 'primary' monitor to be unrotated; but the amount of vertical resolution you can get for the money, without totally sacrificing width, from a rotated secondary monitor is pretty compelling.