Thanks, Frederik, for learning so much in your time with us that you were able to teach, through your example, some of us how to write. Enjoy Heechee heaven, and if you ever figure out how their ships work, come back and see us sometime. (Thanks again. I just realized how the ships work. You pick up a book, you open it to page 1, and *poof*, you're there.)

-Tepco reported that the radiation level was 100-millisieverts. It now transpires that 100-millisieverts was the highest reading that the measuring equipment in use was capable of displaying.

What the actual fuck. How could such a stupid mistake be made?

I appears he gave a few specific people methods on how to avoid the feds on specific (federal) crimes they had committed, that in itself could be (and was) considered aiding.

The prosecution is using it as a religious platform for their pseudoscience saying that any negative speak of their golden cow (polygraph tests) is an affront to god and country.

Essentially the government is trying to frame the issue that anyone that does anti-poly is a child molesting terrorist so they can control the discussion and then control debate on they laws surrounding it.

Reading the article, I 'think' he was aiding specific people that had committed crimes (gave methodology how to get around what they did), and that is how he was charged. The issue is fed.gov is using this as a platform to give the appearance he was charged just for teaching anti-poly alone to cast a net of FUD around other who do so.

What is the point?

Number 1 is fear. Stopping people form putting anti-polygraph information out on the street because of the risk of being detained or harassed by the government.

Number 2 is also fear. Polygraphs aren't a lie detector, they are a psychological operation against the person taking the test, if you know the test is bullshit it's magic fails to work as good.

Study the history on the FBI with polygraphs, they worship them.

It is as if our government has thrown all logic by the wayside and has become a religion unto itself.

The Dell AIOs I use are pretty easy to work on. A stand and plastic cover come off the back and the main components like the hard drive are easy to reach.

My guess. Corn. The amount of corn in said products is apt to have gone up greatly. Also the processing techniques that apply grain processing have changed greatly over that time, enzymes that we use to convert starch to sugar have become much more efficient since then.

-cat chow

Read the first ingredient of most animal foods and you will see that it is corn these days. Unfortunately I don't have any information on '70s animal food.

-When you slice a tomato it you just processed it.

No, you have a cut up tomato, the chemical properties of the tomato are the same.

-When you cook a potato you just processed it.

Yes, when you cook an item you change its chemical make up. Most of the time this has beneficial effects.

Now, saying that cooking is anything like dipping your food in benzene or a vat of enzymes designed for a specific purpose is totally wrong.

You Everybody else.

The specifics are that, statistically, more people are eating foods that have had there sugar, starch, sodium, and fibre levels greatly modified. He did point out the specifics that effect most of the population. Modern shelved food has a lot of added sugar.

We have a winner. There also may be a factor that we eat constantly these days, in the past we had times of low and high calorie intake and that our bodies are not handling a constant influx of high octane fuel.

Personally, I'm going to go with the massive increase in the usage of corn based products. It may not be the corn itself, but some chemical or other actor in it that is causing the effect. The feedstock of almost every animal these days is corn or has many corn based byproducts.

Telstra was only ever a minor player in the NZ telecommunications market.

And last year, they sold the entirety of their operation to Vodafone New Zealand.

>Can the problems be ameliorated with faster, higher capacity nodes?

Probably not.

>More nodes?

Probably, but set all the nodes at a much lower power to reduce their range and reduce conflicts.

> Is data being throttled at the link to the internet?
People would have to test from many non-busy nodes to find that out. It also depends if radio-backhaul is used that gets transported thru busy nodes that end up losing traffic.

>Do they need more links to the internet?

This is Googles home, probably not.

The network theory is well known. In this case it is a tragedy of the commons. Outdoor wireless networks suck in any place with lots of nodes.