It's not that a phone that's offline is still vulnerable to wifi; it's that once this attack (which is carefully designed to get this result) hits you can't get enough control to go offline. The summary's got an inaccurate paraphrase, but TFA's phrasing isn't immediately clear. The researcher's blog has a better description.
They do get a say. They just don't have attending students. I don't either. Can I get my money back?
but the USB 2.0 port should work great, no?
It would be more accurate to say "12th study confirms no link between MMR vaccine and autism", with a subtitle of "versus no studies showing a link"
Next problem (maybe the first problem) is, what is the text of an amendment that would actually fix the problem?
yeah, that's been the case for a long time. If you have a dog right handy you can run it around the car. This is clarifying what qualifies as "right handy".
facebook maybe. If google goes ipv6 nobody will be able to find instructions...
and to replace like with like you'll have to buy it from the manufacturer because no third party will be able to make it talk to the car's network, so they'll be able to raise their prices arbitrarily.
He said it was good for the company, not for him or the kid.
In the US. I believe the person you're responding to was talking about German guidelines.
The _really_ hot stuff has already decayed. High output = short half-life. The most dangerous stuff is not dangerous because it's especially hot, but because the human body likes to retain and concentrate it (cesium-137, for example).
My understanding was that a lot of the moisture that CA usually gets was from the north pacific, carried by winds that are (lately) being diverted by an unusually strong high pressure zone. It seems conceivable that a patch of warm water could make a patch of warm wet air, that would divert more overall moisture than it carries.
Of course, not being a meteorologist, my understanding is probably somewhat flawed. But I don't think it's quite as simple as "this patch has more evaporation therefore CA gets more water".
Thank you for finding actual evidence. However, I think one of your numbers is off. Angular resolution says ~1 arc-second per pixel; field of view says ~120 degrees horizontal that's binocular. The two together says 7200 pixels wide, not 4000 (and more if you're willing to go outside the binocular zone, up to about 12k).
However, that does imply that 8k would probably be "enough" for most purposes, because yeah, to get in close enough to see pixels you have to let some go outside the field of binocular vision.
and this is one reason I want another VW bug. (Plus it's just fun. Given a real engine, anyway...)
yeah, but that way lies a long list of which food, clothing and medical expenses are worthy of being tax exempt and which, being "obviously" luxuries, need not be.
Wouldn't it be easier to tax everything and rebate minimum cost of living expenses?