It isn't how much we make, it's where we can make it and who can afford it. If something like this can be applied to areas where food is scarce to come by (by any method), good for all of us.
I'd searched on what kind of income it takes to afford a $40K+ car. There was a BMW forum asking the same question. Many of the replies were what you'd expect. Doctors, lawyers, investment bankers -- people who simply make not $100,000 per year, but hundreds of thousands if not millions per year. And then there were those who simply prioritize differently -- they rent their home for cheap (under $1000/month), have a moderate income ($50-$60K), and want a nice car and feel like they can pay the $800/month for the lease or loan. I'm with you though -- the Tesla Model S is sweet, but way beyond what I'd pay for a car unless I was making $20K/month or more. That's a lot more than you need, of course, but I'm not so excited about any automobile to blow $70-$100K on it.
The Model 3, should it ever arrive, at a predicted pricepoint of $35K-$50K...that's a possibility. Given that it's electric, I'd consider saving up. Otherwise I might look at the Audi S3.
What are you trying to do? Referring to?
On the assumption you're not trolling, I believe he was referring to these.
One might even suspect that the media pushes (or is pushed) to put Christianity in the best light and any other religion in a poor light because most of the country's political donors are Christian. It strengthens your base.
Even worse, every prediction they have made about actual temperature has been falsified. Every single one! Five year predictions, wrong, ten year predictions, even further off, 15 year predictions way out of line, 20 year predictions so far off that statistics has falsified the models to 99% confidence levels.
Note that as time goes further out, the predictive power decreases dramatically. That is the opposite of the claim "we can predict climate on 100 year scales but not weather on yearly scales."
If your predictions get further and further from the truth as time goes on, you do not get to continue to use those predictions to force others to go without.
Agreed. The intent, if I had to guess, was not to stop teaching the official Scientific Method (ask, research, hypothesize, test, analyze, share), but to draw focus away from discussions that would muddy the Method. "But Jesus says..." or "I don't think the FSM's tentacles could reach THAT far to anoint the ninjas and therefore cause a tsunami that overwhelmed the Pacific pirates..." As much as those are processes. So teach the scientific method, but leave out the part discussing how or why you're questioning this or that. That should be obvious: because it's there and we want to know how it works.
What they found, as I recall, was that there was no impact because people spend roughly the same amount on entertainment regardless of how much they pirate, it was simply that they were spending it in different areas. Someone who was pirating films, for instance, would still spend their entertainment budget but might do so on books or music or video games instead of films.
I might be misunderstanding, but unless you're talking about tax collection or those few corporations that have a hand in books,movies, and video games, I don't think that, as a movie producer, I'd be all that excited about someone watching my movie without paying, regardless if they paid for Diablo 3. That's kind of an odd argument to make.
I respect the fact that people work hard to make movies/music/games/books/paintings/etc and the best way to compensate them is with money. One could certainly argue that the amount someone gets paid to do certain things -- like Robert Downey making millions for one movie -- could be adjusted. However the "free market" seems to think it's fine -- if we didn't pay him millions, he couldn't afford that million dollar home on the coast that was so tragically lost to helicopter-borne missile fire....
Um, this is the first term where he had super-majorities in both house and Senate? Where they could have passed absolutely any partisan crap they wanted? How we got Obamacare?
What exactly would it take for the Dems to "own it"?
If you want to get into someone else's corner office, sure.
The get is to create your own corner office. Then it is about competence.
Similar experience. Judge made it clear to everyone that your options were:
Guilty: feel free to explain.
Not Guilty: Choose a date for your court appearance and don't forget to bring witnesses, evidence, lawyer (or have on appointed), etc.
I was doing 80 MPH on an empty freeway but it was 15 MPH over the limit. Of course I was guilty. But it was on the way to the airport where I was out of the country for 2 months so when the fine came via mail, then the collection agencies got involved...well, when I got back to 10 letters and a dozen voice messages, I just paid the collection agency not knowing any better (Hint: Never pay the collection agency -- deal with the police). When I finally got to court I said I'm guilty and here's why I was late paying. The judge cut my ticket in half, had the collection agency pay me back. Still had points on my license.
Another thing about standing before a judge. Try not to be an asshat. People try to stare the bailiff and judge down, be surly, etc. The judge isn't an administrative form. While bound by laws, the sentence is up to him. Be polite, joke around, whatever -- but try not to be a jerk unless he gives you cause, as he's the guy who's deciding whether to say "Thanks for being clear and honest, fine reduced to $30" or "Plaintiff will pay full fee".
Yes, it is relatively easy. You use a phased array for beam steering / directional sensitivity. If you put something the size of Aricebo in orbit, you could presumably directly read the electrical signals of a human brain. And the electrical activity at the rear of the brain can be directly translated to what is being heard. So no phone required at all, at least for the uplink!
The same thing is possible for the downlink too, but there may be slight side effects. (Think "This is your brain in a microwave oven...")
In that scenario, what is to prevent the "evil" client from teleporting non-visible units around the map at will?
Even bigger issue - how do you determine if a unit is visible, if you do not know all the opposition's unit positions?
I don't think that is a workable solution. Either such calculations are done on the server, or it is hackable, unfortunately.
Yes, all you idiots who want an Internet Of Things, go build your own internetwork and GTF off of ours. That should free up enough IPv4 addresses to keep us going a couple more decades.
I don't see why this hasn't resulted in a class action law suit by the people buying internet fro Comcast. Unless they are buying "the internet except for Netflix", this should be actionable...
Personally I'm excellent at spelling but it often doesn't come through in my writing...
I know! This is why I'm on the national spelling bee competitive tour! You too?!