The opposite has also been observed (http://gizmodo.com/the-secret-to-weight-loss-might-be-poop-transplants-fro-1265888152). As someone who is married to someone who has struggled with her weight for all her life, and has done everything including a strict 1000 calorie diet with very little results, I KNOW there is more to it than "just don't eat as much". The people that don't have the issue or haven't lived with it don't understand the issue, and assume that "it is their fault".
Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!
I'm currently in the process of building a company, and have the advantage of utilizing student labor as part of the development process. How I handled this was that I actually developed a template but static HTML website that provided the UI that I wanted. I then NEXT developed the "help page" for the UI, to explain how the interface worked in great detail. What I found vs. prior development was that be specifying how the UI should work from the user's perspective, things worked well. The things that broke were where my help documentation wasn't accurate enough. Develop your user documentation first, and the visual UI, and you may find the developers can figure out things from there.
You do know that this was about system administration and not access to user accounts, and it was the LACK of two factor on a system that resulted in a hole. This actually supports the assertion that everybody should be using it.
tbh, you have two choices for batteries today: Charge them fast, and they don't last as long, or charge them slow, and they last forever. Heat is the problem the batteries have. If you charge them just fast enough so that in the morning they are full, or at least they never get hot, you are going to do well. The difference that a Scandinavian country imposes is hardly likely to make a difference, due to the phone being in a pocket, your hand, or indoors while charging.
The other idea is to buy a phone with fewer features, but has a long battery life. OnePlus One? Yep, works for me for 2 days at a time, but I charge it each day. I never have an issue where I have to charge it during a single day.
based on my experience, the #1 power consumer is... a bad cell signal. If you are at 92% after 8 hours on ANY phone, you are likely sitting in a building with a cell tower a few feet from your head, or you are just straight up lying about your power usage (or both). I've taken a few last-gen phones, put them on airplane mode, then powered up wifi, and they can last over a week. What burns the battery? mobile data access, and the screen.
Once any system handles Pitt well, they have won the map issue. As someone who lives in the city, I can say that nobody has won the city. Google is close, but they have not won.
Every person participating in an ESPP program or with stock option income will have to do it. That is a fair number of people. That is also why they are doing it...
In the area I live in, we have a utility of power generation and a separate utility power supply. On our power bill, we have the power supply charging for the utility of bring the power to us. This includes maintenance of the poles that carry any of the rest of the utilities, but each have their own height on the pole they are allowed to use. As such, the power supply company maintains for example a high strength wire at the top of the poles, so that a tree is unlikely to hit the lines below it (often we have trees leaning against it until they take care of the problem). Then the power lines are strung below this line, then the Comcast cables, the FIOS runs, etc. The all are on a single pole, but a single player is responsible for maintaining the infrastructure itself.
Ferguson is not a good example because the police officer did NOT know that anything had happened at the convenience store, however the fact that the event had happened was likely why he behaved as he did when confronted by the police officer.
The question is if replacing the fleet would have triggered production based pollution that offset any gains. Making new cars isn't a pollution free activity after all. The net result may have been a reduction in worldwide pollution instead.
I'm not sure you are aware, but crime rate has fallen across the world, even in countries that never went through a "get tough on crime". One plausible theory (I won't say it is correct, just possible) is that Lead poisoning in youth resulted in criminal tendencies later (http://www.forbes.com/sites/alexknapp/2013/01/03/how-lead-caused-americas-violent-crime-epidemic/). Attributing to the incarceration the reduction in crime though is a pretty tough sell, in particular when you look at crime statistics of juvenile offenders who's father is incarcerated: http://www.scholarsstrategynetwork.org/sites/default/files/ssn_basic_facts_swisher_on_children_of_the_incarcerated.pdf.
When I wear a watch of any sort, it aggravates the nerves in my wrist. As such, the entire smart-watch wars are something I simply have to "watch" by the wayside. I suspect more people have the same issue, but haven't put 2+2 together on what is triggering it.
How about post a PSA in it's place, and just not include the snuff films?
Good point, in addition, the question can be asked that if Tesla builds the factory (which they will in one state or another) will they be controlled under the remaining CA regulations better than other states. In other words, CA can say "this is such a big factory, we need to look at the big picture and understand that if we can regulate them, it will be better for the overall health of the WORLD than if they go somewhere else. As such, we will reduce some of the requirements such that the overall benefit will be greater." It isn't necessarily a "one state vs. another" but what is best for the world. This is such a big project that it is likely to be better managed than most by both the company and the state, that they can agree to cut some regulations simply because others will be better enforced.
The infamous commerce clause trumps states rights
No it doesn't. It's just abused as a power grab. It was only meant to apply to a limited number of things.
See, it DOES trump states rights, as proven by matters of law. You may not agree with it, but that doesn't change the facts. In this particular case, I think that there should be Federal Law to unify what everybody should expect as far as recording rights are concerned, and the law should be "anybody can record any conversation they are having at any time through electronic means". Since any conversation could in theory result in a verbal contract, it is only reasonable that said contracts should be legally recordable to protect the individuals entering into said contracts.