So is entering an url in a web browser.
So is entering an url in a web browser.
Nobody is preventing carriers from charging for bandwidth. If net neutrality was enacted into law tomorrow carriers could still charge per MB downloaded or something like that.
The problem is that they want to charge depending on what is in the data. They want to charge you more for getting 100 MB worth of movies or voice than 100 MB worth of random webpages. Now that is fucked up, because (a) the carriers have no business looking at the stuff i download and (b) if they are allowed to do that they will just tax the popular websites and web services ensuring that any innovation or success on the web is quickly punished.
The correct term should have been pro-telecom. And the republicans are acting on behalf of corporations, just not all corporation, only telecoms. Telecoms have the most to gain from destroying net neutrality and they can bring the most pressure on the senate, as they already have more ingrained lobbyists than the various internet companies.
Your statement about the Taiwan and Korea markets is nonsensical. Why does using a heart beat type trading decrease the total amount of shares traded in a day? And why would that have anything to do with the overall market value?
Regarding the dark pools, if you thought about it for a second, you would realize that those dark pools are partially caused by exactly the high frequency trading you support. People do not want to suffer the tax of the HFTs on the big exchanges, so they trade outside of them in dark pools. Of course this causes all kinds of inefficiencies. If the central markets like NASDAQ and NYSE were fair, and had low transaction costs, more people would trade there and that would make our economy much more efficient as buyers would more easily find sellers to get the best price for all parties involved.
Why do you think that? The government has been passing laws for cars for a hundred years and I am not aware of a single time where they banned existing cars for not complying with a law that was passed after those cars were legally sold. They merely required all the new cars to comply.
Even the Corvair is still legal. Don't quote me on this, but I am pretty sure it would be legal to drive a car with no break lights or signals if you can find one that is old enough.
If this passes it will be a law that is applied to new cars only, as has always been the case.
Well, first of all this is unrelated to the present article. This is about removing the blind which is diagonally back and to the side of the car. The article talks about removing a blind spot which is directly behind the car and results from the rear window being to high (which is a problem for almost all SUVs and minivans, as well as many types of cars).
The reason why that mirror is illegal probably has to do with the distortion it causes. Distortion tends to make things seem a different distance than they are, so it is not certain a mirror like this would not cause more accidents. But the government should certainly investigate this.
The achievement here is going faster than the wind in the direction of the wind. This is something sailboats cannot do. Sailboats can only travel faster then the wind when they are at an angle to the wind (usually going against the wind).
Hmm, the manual cars I had would simply not let you shift that low. There was some kind of mechanical thing that would prevent you from shifting into low gear if you are driving fast even if you had the clutch fully pressed.
Everyone should camber their tires. I did this myself on my subaru rally car. It is very easy, just a couple of button presses on the old PS2 remote, and you have cambered tires. And your car looks way cooler.
But I think you need to buy the racing body first.
All of these designs use highly radioactive material as fuel and that will always work for a dirty bomb.
Also they use the same fuel grade uranium as other reactors use, which is very expensive and valuable and it can be stolen. It would be incredibly foolish to leave these reactors unguarded.
The only difference about pebble beds is that they split up the uranium and put it in small graphite balls, but I don't see how this changes things, someone can still steal the balls.
You should explain to the DHS how dirty bombs are not a big deal.
Regarding fuel grade uranium, it is very expensive, there are thousands of powerplants in the world that need it so I am sure at least a couple of them would be willing to obtain it for half price on the black market.
There were several cases of people trying to export the stuff when the iron curtain fell, including some cases of people duying in their cars from exposure as they are trying to move a uranium rod.
Really? and how would keep anyone from taking the whole thing breaking it apart somewhere else and selling the valuable fuel grade uranium on the black market?
Or worse yet, using the uranium and all the radioactive parts of the reactor for a dirty bomb?
Or even worse yet, trying to do one of the above, but fucking up and letting all kinds of radioactive liquids drain in the drinking water underground?
Let us not be confused by suggestions that just because Sen. Kit Bond criticised the previous proposal, his proposal is any good.
IMO there is absolutely no reason to put a cyber security czar in the pentagon.
In America, as in any free country the military should do nothing but armed conflict with other nations, and civilian agencies should provide internal security.
But hopefully the existence of multitude of bills will result in no bill being passed, which would probably be the best outcome.
Not all the 8000 journals are supplied by Nature however. The summary says that NAture's group publishes 67 journals. It is safe to say that UC subscribes to all of them. So the more correct math would be:
67*17000= 1 139 000 just for the 67 Nature publications.
However, the problem is that Nature is a leader in scientific publishing, so if they succeed in quadrupling their prices, many other scientific journals will do the same.
Most modern flash memories have their controllers check which blocks are dying or dead and re-route write and read requests to good blocks. So while your flash may seem to be working perfectly well, various blocks inside it may be dying and its storage size may be progressively decreasing.
So I hope they are rewriting the entire flash in their test. Otherwise it is not representative.
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary saftey deserve neither liberty not saftey." -- Benjamin Franklin, 1759