Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!
We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).
RedHat distros set a root password during install, but also require the creation of a non-root user; this user is added to the wheel group.
I don't know if you meant to include Fedora but on all my Fedora installs the only member of the wheel group has been root. I believe the same is true of Centos but I don't have it installed anywhere right now to check.
It doesn't exonerate Captain Rogers, nor can it explain why his crew was seemingly unable to read the information that was staring them in the face, specifically the fact that the aircraft was climbing the entire time they tracked it. That flight profile screams "NOT A THREAT" to anyone versed in anti air warfare, which you would expect the crew of an air defense cruiser to be, yet somehow they reported the contact as descending on an attack vector. There were doubtless many reasons for this failure, combat stress, the newness (at the time) of the AEGIS combat system, the double IFF response, the failure to establish communications with Iran Air 655, and so on. None of those facts excuse the failure though, at the end of the day the Captain of a ship is responsible for the happenings aboard ship, whether he could have influenced them or not, and Captain Rogers certainly had control over the training of his crew.
I seem to recall stories at the time of the shoot-down that the F-14s operating from the dual-use airbase Flight 655 took off from would routinely set their IFF transponders to Mode III (Civilian). If the crew of the Vincennes was aware of that then the IFF response from Flight 655 would have looked no different from an F-14.
This doesn't excuse Capt. Rogers since the flight profile and heading were, as you say, non-threatening, but it does remove a useful piece of information that might have led to a different decision.
Roy Spencer? - 10 to 1 the data is stratospheric temps presented as surface temps..
No, the data is accurate. It's a common method of cherry-picking used by deniers. All you have to do is pick a local maxima (like 1998) and run the average from there for a small period like 10 or 15 years.
A 15-year average doesn't mean anything - in climate science you need at least a 30 year average to see a meaningful trend.
Search for NEMA enclosures and pick the one that fits your machine.
Here's one you might like but it's not cheap at $325 each.
Of course, other articles and studies are telling me that my diet pop is messing with my brain and making me crave more sweets anyway.
Oh, it's much worse than that!
A few choice quotes from the article:
"Aspartame accounts for over 75 percent of the adverse reactions to food additives reported to the FDA. Many of these reactions are very serious, including seizures and death."
"Aspartate and glutamate act as neurotransmitters in the brain by facilitating the transmission of information from neuron to neuron. Too much aspartate or glutamate in the brain kills certain neurons by allowing the influx of too much calcium into the cells. This influx triggers excessive amounts of free radicals, which kill the cells."
"The absorption of methanol into the body is sped up considerably when free methanol is ingested. Free methanol is created from aspartame when it is heated to above 86 Fahrenheit (30 Centigrade). This would occur when aspartame-containing product is improperly stored or when it is heated (e.g. as part of a "food" product such as Jello). Methanol breaks down into formaldehyde in the body. Formaldehyde is a deadly neurotoxin."
"DKP is a byproduct of aspartame metabolism. DKP has been implicated in the occurrence of brain tumors."
Then there's the phosphoric acid content in diet soda that erodes tooth enamel and promotes kidney stones.
Needless to say, I don't drink diet sodas.
the EPA can't force large manufacturing firms to curb their water usage or limit how much they're allowed to pollute.
EPA action is not the only means to that goal. I work for a "large manufacturing firm" and we work hard to reduce water usage and limit energy use. It's not because the suits suddenly got the green bug, I assure you. The reason we do this is because it saves money.
Increasing or introducing taxes means prices go up.
It also means that government revenue goes up, which leaves room for lawmakers to lower other taxes to compensate.
But that's not really the point. The production, sale and use of fossil fuels imposes an external cost on everyone in form of more severe weather - longer droughts, more floods, higher food prices, etc. Raising taxes on fossil fuels merely recovers the the cost they impose on society. To do otherwise would constitute a hidden subsidy of the fossil fuel industry at the expense of everyone else.
I am more curious about what the reply was to the undegrad student and how did they keep him quiet.
According to TFA the undergrad student was a she not a he. From the article:
The BBC aired a special on the Citicorp Center crisis, and one of its viewers was Diane Hartley. It turns out that she was the student in LeMessurier's story. She never spoke with LeMessurier; rather, she spoke with one of his junior staffers.
Hartley didn't know that her inquiry about how the building deals with quartering winds led to any action on LeMessurier's part. It was only after seeing the documentary that she began to learn about the impact that her undergraduate thesis had on the fate of Manhattan.
Tell them (your girlfriends) that the Paleo diet is the way to go - steak, bacon, fried veggies - good stuff.
The elephant in the room in the Paleo diet is no refined sugar. A real deal-breaker for most girls (and guys) - no dessert, pie, ice cream, cake, cookies, chocolates, sodas, candy, donuts, or anything else with sugar in the top 4 on the ingredient list.
Sadly, this is the one thing that makes the most difference, not just for weight loss, but in how you feel. I have much more energy since I cut out sugar. And my tastebuds have even come back - regular food tastes so much better now. I'm eating all the time, snacking on nuts and fruit constantly in between meals, and I'm gradually losing weight without a whole lot of exercise (I have a desk job).
I can't code but I can write a check. Post that bad boy to Kickstarter and auction off the low user ids. I would suggest the name 'slashdottir' but you'd get sued.
GE 26 Watt Energy Smart CFL - 100 Watt Replacement, about $250 each -- rated at 8,000 hours
As it turns out, your $250 "GE 26 Watt Energy Smart CFL - 100 Watt Replacement" bulb is now on sale for $13.40 each:
If we extrapolate, by tomorrow the price should be about 4 cents each.
I want my flying car!
Ok, here ya go. Not too old, very good shape and only $408,000!
Link to Original Source
First, I am quite good at providing citations and references.
And you go on to provide these two links:
Principia-scientific is a vanity site run by Joseph E Postma, who is not a climate scientist and has never published a peer-reviewed paper on climate science. If that's the best you can do then you don't have a case.