You realise this article is about efficiency, not emissions, right?
You realise this article is about efficiency, not emissions, right?
It seems like you're trying to express a problem, when in actual fact, you've expressed a solution.
the federal government takes a nice large chunk to pay for our military
Great - then you know what to do - elect people who pledge to shrink your military in exchange for providing enough money for working health care.
Why have a separate table, when we've already learnt that having multiple glyph lookup tables is a terrible idea, and leads to no one being able to figure out which lookup table to use for a particular file. Unicode has plenty of room for all forms of written communication (hyroglyphics/emojis included), so use the one single table that we have pretty much standardised, and move on.
Well yes, that's because every time someone brings out "means testing", they don't mean "we're going to check for people fraudulently claiming this thing", because the actual rate of fraudulent claiming is very low (contrary to what your local/national news channels will tell you). Instead, what they mean is "we're going to make the test for being disabled harder to prove, and take disability benefits away from people who genuinely are disabled".
In the UK, more "means testing" was brought in for disability benefit a few years ago. They introduced the idea that you needed to prove to an independent doctor (not your own, regular GP), that you were disabled. If you didn't go to this brand new doctor, at a date and time of the governments choosing, then you did not qualify.
This meant that for certain disabilities, it was nearly impossible to successfully claim. For example, people with cystic fibrosis had two options. Either they had a day where they could barely move, and did not make it to the doctor (bam, no ability to claim now). Or they had a day where they could move, made it to the doctor, and the doctor said "well, you made it here, and you're talking to me, clearly you can do an office job" (bam, no ability to claim).
The thing is, unless you switch jobs, you are actually doing the same job. Why do you deserve more money simply for the fact that you have been doing the same thing longer than everybody else?
Because the cost of living has gone up (inflation), so paying you the same absolute amount of money to do that job is actually paying you a lower value. Why do you think that someone who remains in a job is worth less than someone with zero experience?
I realize that with people who do IT work such as programmers or system admins that there is an increased level of productivity you can get from those who have more knowledge of the code and/or systems that are dealt specifically at a single company, but after a point, you fail to actually provide more value than you did the previous year. Essentially, you plateau.
But again - you don't provide less value, which is what not giving you a pay raise in line with inflation reflects.
Why do you think a larger population matters? If the system works in a country of 10 million people, it can also work in a state of 10 million people. Repeat that 50 (or only 30 times), and you're done.
For reference, the 1% begins at a yearly salary of somewhere around $180-190k. Even at that salary, it's gonna take you a while to save up to have so much disposable income (and no mortgage etc) to own a Lambo. What most people mean when they talk about 1%ers, and think of people sat on millions of dollars, is 0.1%ers.
While I can completely understand why you might think parent is an astroturf, I do own a VW (a 2014 Jetta 1.8T), and do indeed get better than the advertised millage. It was advertised at 25/36m/(us)g, I typically get 28 in a city, and 37 on a freeway.
I'm sure there are other VWs that do not meet the advertised specs, but certainly this car has given me the most believable estimate of any I've ever had (every other vehicle I've ever had has not got close to its fuel efficiency stats).
Actually no, I can't find a single title where the Xbox can do a higher resolution or frame rate than the PS4. And that's not surprising - again, the PS4 has more powerful hardware.
The fact that there exist games where the Xbox One can do 1080p/60 does not mean that in all cases it can. There are several games that render at 1080p on PS4, but 720p or 900p on Xbox, e.g. Assassin's Creed IV, Batman Arkham Knight, CoD, Destiny, Diablo III, Dragon Age Inquisition, Far Cry 4, Just Cause 3, Lords of the Fallen, Metro: Redux, Shadow of Mordor, Pro Evo Soccer 2015, Project Cars, Shadow Warrior, Star Wars Battle Front*, The Evil Within, Thief, Tom Raider: Definitive Edition, Watch Dogs*
* These games don't do 1080p on PS4 either, but are still higher resolution on the PS4 than on the Xbox.
Get the PS4... It's the faster machine, can run games at a higher resolution, and has a bunch of exclusives purely by dint of the developers not being able to make it work fast enough on the Xbox. There's something like 100 more games available for it.
No, it doesn't mean "encryption". It's perfectly possible to have encryption in which more parties than the sender and receiver know the key. It's not very useful if what you're trying to do is secure the communication of A and B, but that doesn't make it "not encryption".
You're missing the point. The point is that even when the super sekrit spy agencies have access to all the unencrypted data, they can't use it to prevent these attacks (as demonstrated that they failed to use it here).
So what does removing encryption buy us:
The super sekrit spy agencies can in theory read it, but they also can't manage to use it effectively.
Criminals can potentially hack Google/Apple and gain access to my messaging history, and personal information, allowing them to steal all kinds of my things.
That's not a good pay off. The only way that there would be some pay off worth considering is if the spy agencies could actually use this information to prevent the attacks, and even in that case, the pay of is deeply questionable - identity fraud happens orders of magnitude more often than terrorist attacks, and can completely ruin people's lives. Making identity fraud easier for the pay off of occasionally preventing a terrorist attack doesn't sound like a reasonable pay off to me.
It means encryption where the vendor of the encryption software has zero knowledge of the key.
All they had to do was write something similar to WINE that took every Android call and did it natively.
You realise that Wine is 1.4 million lines of code, and *still* doesn't accurately implement all the windows SDKs, right?
That's not an "all" you have to do.
All Finagle Laws may be bypassed by learning the simple art of doing without thinking.