I liked LILO, because of the simple fact that is was so much simpler than GRUB. If you are booting a single partition system (plus swap) from ext3, there is not much wizbang you need. But then I also just use what the distro uses by default, since it works out of the box.
Actually that analogy holds up quite well, just they ignore the corollary. A good craftsman does not blame his tools, since he knows that the tool selection process is part of the job. A good craftsman will not even start a job with a crappy tool.
Exactly, I was going to propose SCL (Simatic Control Language), but you beat me to it. SCL is a pre standard dialect of IEC 61131-3, ST. In the case of PCS7 the CFC and SFC code is first translated to SCL and then to S7 byte code.
In this case you are wrong. What is violated is the "enjoyment of the land". They are not trespassing though. The judge was very specific about it:
The airplane is part of the modern environment of life, and the inconveniences which it causes are normally not compensable under the Fifth Amendment. The airspace, apart from the immediate reaches above the land, is part of the public domain. We need not determine at this time what those precise limits are. Flights over private land are not a taking, unless they are so low and so frequent as to be a direct and immediate interference with the enjoyment and use of the land. We need not speculate on that phase of the present case..
If you happen to live under class B or C airspace, but you are not directly in the approach path, you are not recompensated. In addition, the planes do not even have to fly over your actual land, if the noise they create is significant, you may get recompensation.
But in this case it does not apply. A drone minding it's own business at 200ft off the ground it not trespassing and as long as it is not violating any other of your rights (i.e. right to privacy), you must tolerate it.
The problem with core subjects is that is is expected that everybody take them and must get a passing grade. English and math are core subjects because from that stems almost all general education. The problem with CS is, it requires a very specific skill set that not every body has, as a result you would cut out a large amount of people, just because some body deemed a "must have skill". Nobody would expect business administration to be core subject in school?
Unfortunately your opinion is not correct. The FAA asserts the right to airspace, including a few feet above the ground. There was the case United States v. Causby where military aircraft where flying at 83 above his farm and disturbing his sheep. The ruling was that the military did not violate his fifth amendment right, but still was compensated on the ground of the noise and commotion made by the planes.
The operator was flying the drone in class G airspace and had all the right to it. The safe flying altitude for aircraft is 500 ft AGL (above ground level). As a result it is considered a good idea to fly drones below 400 ft AGL. He was flying at 272 ft relative to his home point and when the drone crashed it was -43 ft. Now taking into account that the terrain may have height differences, it probably will not exceed 50 ft. This putts the drone still above 200 ft AGL. This is still a respectful height.
Irrespective of the any aviation law, there are still privacy concerns and these don't end at the property line. A drone hovering outside a property (i.e. a celebrity's property) can still film into said property and probably will break some privacy laws if it does more than just "glance".
I hate it every time some research comes out that tries to shines some light at shortfalls in current research and then it is "controversial" because it "could give an argument to the anti-XYZ". This comes up with vaccine research, climate research and whatnot. I think every person that utters something like that is actually undermining the entire legitimate research community. The forced need to appear to be united give the opponents more suspicion, not less.
We don't actually need new laws to go after people who do something bad with a robot.
And that is the reason why the police has trouble figuring out what to charge him with. The legal situation is no different than when he was shooting a couple rounds for fun. That it involved a drone at low altitude (high altitude may be a different case), makes no difference.
Please explain the following:
How can it be that the exact same hip replacement in the US costs 10x the cost than in Spain? It is cheaper to fly to Spain, stay a month in a hotel, get your hip replaced, run with the bulls, get injured, get your hip replaced again and still have spending money.
Just to ensure there is no confusion, it is the same operation with the same materials (even same brand) and a similarly qualified doctor. Also, yes your insurance will not cover the travel to Spain.
No system is perfect, but the US system is the worst*. You pay your last penny for medical services and you don't even get better service, in some cases even worse. Many people in the US don't even have dental coverage; WTF?! You don't realize how much you actually get ripped of.
* out of USA, Germany, France, Spain and UK
If you knew what you where talking about could have a point, but as it stands you sound like a shotgun polishing hill billy.
The primary problem with healthcare in general is that it is an inelastic market for individuals. That is if you need a treatment to save your life, it does nto mater if it costs $7 or $7000, you will find the money to pay for it; even if you have to beg on Facebook. The primary problem that insurances have in the US is that they are almost all small and have little bargaining power. This is different in countries that have socialized health care, it is one insurance and they have a huge bargaining power. The result is that in the US the healthcare costs are the highest world wide, by orders of a magnitude.
One of the valid solutions in the US would be if the insurances came together and bargained together. Alternatively a semi socialized approach may also work (like in Germany), you define by law a catalog of basic healthcare procedures and their costs. Then private insurance companies work within this catalog and provide discretionary additional services. For example tooth filling is covered by all at a certain rate, but if you like white filling that looks like your tough you got ti either pay extra from your own pocket or get an insurance that covers that.
I have seen 4 different health care systems in action and the US sucks the most.
maybe it would be safer to just rear-end the other guy?
If you could not properly stop in a straight line you either did not pay attention or you did not maintain the safety distance. I would rather have a car on car collision with dV of 20 mph than a truck on car collision. Even at slow speeds the truck will pile drive through your car.
If you look at the graphic you can see they made an effort and then failed miserably at reality. They compared students with employees at companies. For starters that sounds reasonable to not demand they try to reduce required qualifications for minorities.
But then they fail in two ways, first it appears that their numbers are all recent. They ignore the fact that the racial composition has changed over time and the primary differences you can see are mostly lag in the system. The second issue is that they compare US universities (only US permanent residents) with companies that hire people form outside. Currently we are seeing an influx of Chinese and Indian workers being employed by companies. You can see this that in some cases it's even double in comparison to the student composition. This influx results in a bias that reduces all numbers, including white. It also ignores the fact that many Asian, especially Chinese will study in the US on a student visa (not counted in study) and then start working at a company in the US on a working visa (counted).
Except it does not apply to currencies, because as the name says it is value ADDED tax. What is exactly taxed is the amount that was added from buying to selling the good. For example a shop buys chocolate for 0.5 a price and sells it for 1. The shop will then pay the VAT on the 0.5 that was added. As a consumer you don't see this, because you pay the VAT for each step and originally the value stared with 0. This is complicated by the technicality that the bulk of the VAT is actually payed by the store selling to the consumer, but they are just routing the taxes of others, since they got their products VAT exempt.
But that is not true to currencies. For example if I "buy" USD for EUR, no value was added. Although the exchanges take a fee (which may contain VAT), but the value only converted. This is the same for gold and in some areas silver coins for example, since they are considered a currency. The assertion that BTC is a currency and value is only converted, not added, is totally correct.
Not quite, BTC has no leverage to implement monetary policy. The result is that there is no way to counteract severe inflation and deflation. Some people think that this is a good idea; either because "market powers" or because it means they can trade (gamble) it like a stock.
In addition, the amount of power required to validate transactions ("mining") is astounding. The primary reason why paper money was introduced is to detach the money generation from it's value.
All things considered, yes BTC is economically and technologically in the bronze age. It is not significantly different from gold coins, with the only advantage that you can trade them through a computer.
The value of a program is proportional to the weight of its output.