Except that the government has kind of ignored the last part of Amendment 10..
I would argue it's pretty much ignored it in it's entirety. Then again, the Government (and the courts) seems to be good at ignoring the rest of the document as well.
The Bill of Rights is actually fairly clear that the only legal powers of the Federal Government are those explicitly granted (I.e. Enumerated Powers) to it by the Constitution, and that anything not otherwise prohibited is reserved for individual States to excercise.
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
That Hubble also went WAY over budget, not to mention the incurred cost of sending a shuttle up not once but twice to fix and upgrade it.
Five times actually...
SM-1 in December 1993
SM-2 in February 1997
SM-3A in December 1999
SM-3B in March 2002
and the most recent and final mission,
SM-4 in May 2009
Most satellites are in geostationary orbit much, much higher than the station, which orbits the earth about fifteen times a day.
Actually, most are in LEO (Low Earth Orbit), the easiest orbit to reach. Also, both GSO (geostationary) and GEO (geosynchronous) orbits have an orbital period of 24 hours (geostationary is a geosynchronous orbit with an inclination of 0deg.), completing a single orbit per day. The end result is that GSO, with an orbital period of 24 hours appears to hover a figure eight pattern (size is dependent on the inclination) over the surface of the Earth while GEO, with an inclination of 0deg, appears to hover over a single fixed point over the equator. Geosync is a lot more common than geostationary since geostationary is much more difficult to maintain and there are only a small handful of geostationary "slots".
up to geostationary orbit or else ever so slightly higher, and using it to refuel until it itself runs out of fuel, then deorbiting it to burn up and launching another.
Except satellites in geosynchronous orbits are too high up to de-orbit back down into the Earth, instead the remaining fuel is used to boost the satellites even higher and out of the way into what's known as a graveyard orbit.
What's even better is when I pop in a BluRay and they spend the next five minutes extolling the virtues of "HD" trying to convince me to adopt BluRay... WTF, I'm watching your bleeping BluRay, you don't have to try to sell me on a technology I've obviously alredy adopted...
Seriously. I could see some sort of promo on a DVD trying to convince people to try out BluRay, but if someone is watching a BluRay you don't have to tell them about the benefits, real or perceived to convince them to try BluRay... They're obviously already using BluRay. You don't see ads on television telling you how great television is and why you should upgrade from radio... Ok, you see cable and satellite companies advertising on cable TV, but in large part they're trying to tell you that they're less evil than the OTHER cable company and are trying to get you to switch, or keep you from switching providers rather than trying to convince you to stop watching over the air broadcasts and discover subscription television.
Better then making the trailers skippable (which is a bare minimum) better yet, take me straight to the root menu and stick them in a "trailers for other movies you might like" extra section... I know my parents after watching a DVD/BluRay will usually explore the extras, trailers, etc.
Congressmen/women have to go thru the scan. Everyone has to go thru the scan.
Not all of them do. Those high enough up the ranks can bypass security when flying commercial.
Before the collective wrath of Slashdot falls upon an innocent* cyber squatter, bear in mind that the URL listed in the text of the email wasn't actually the URL that the href linked to (text claimed to point to one spot, actual href tag pointed some place completely different). It didn't link to a PDF either but an executable with the
*Presumed innocent in the context of this malware, not in the grander scheme of effing up the domain registry system for the rest of us...
1) You usually listen in your car, and road-noise alone will destroy your ability to discern slight volume changes and perception of frequencies anywhere near 12khz and above
Actually, I usually have talk radio on in the car...
2) If you don't listen in a car, you often use your cheap speakers on your laptop
Can't say I do that either. Sure, sometimes I'll use the lower fidelity of headphones/earbuds hooked up to my iPhone, but that's not where most of my listening takes place...
3) Most headphones people use are either cheap (under $50), or they are biased on the lower-end, and most are not equalized correctly, or not equalized to your ear physiology (different sizes ear canals can cause resonance/standing waves that cause a different perception in frequency for different people -- each set must be tuned individually if you are a true audiophile).
Well, the headphone/earbuds I usually use fall in the ~$70-100 range, even though I'm not an "audiophile" since I refuse to pay $400 for magic ethernet cables...
4) If you're older than 21, you probably can't hear above 16Khz at all
Well, my ears aren't as good as they were ten years ago, but I've tried to avoid the normal things that cause hearing loss and damage (such as, I dunno, obscenely loud music?)
5) Your ears are not perfect (many people's frequency response is different from one ear to the other)
6) Your player is not perfect
7) Your speakers are not perfect, and you most likely haven't calibrated them with an RTA for the room they sit in or for where people are actually positioned.
8) The humidity, temperature, air pressure, and even the air pressure on the other side of your ear-drum changes frequently causing a difference in frequency response.
And if I'm completely wrong on points 1-8, then you are now in the
Though I never said I was the target audience for "mass produced mp3's", your post really comes across as a snotty "audiophile"... I've pretty much stopped listening to the Mp3 format. The music on my iPhone is mostly 256kbit AAC with a sprinkling of Apple Lossless. One of the reasons I often buy CD's over downloaded is because I know I have them in the most lossless and unencrypted format available to me. There are a few high-end sites (such as Linn Records UK) that sell lossless FLAC format music not only in standard CD 16bit/44.1khz but also in higher resolution "Studio" quality formats 24bit/88.2/96khz, some tracks are even available in 192khz. The "modern" pop/rock/etc. stuff isn't as much of a big deal but when dealing with stuff that is a lot more about the acoustics then you better believe the audio fidelity makes a difference.
Of course music that is produced with the intent of distribution at the higher resolutions often has higher production values anyway since they are targeting a different audience that cares about such things as the dynamic range and who are more likely to pick up on subtle issues whereas many "joe listeners" prefer the sound of the lossy compressions since that's what they have been raised listening to... sad really.
Sure, I don't have $10k speakers or a $20k receiver, but I can hear subtle differences, even if some of it may be attributable to placebo effect. I do have equipment that can handle some of the higher resolutions both on my primary stereo system as well as my primary desktop system. It find is much easier to down-sample a 24-bit/88.2khz track for whatever my listening environment may be then to do the inverse for when I wish to really "enjoy" and "experience" the music.
you can also get kidnapped by one of those pirates gangs and spend months while someone put (a lot of) money on the table to take you back.
See, that's exactly why Sony includes DRM on the movies, to prevent exactly this sort of piracy.....
Republicans on the other hand, want the government completely out of their lives
"You keep using that word, I do not think it means what you think it means..."
You seem to have "Republicans" confused with "Conservatives" and "Libertarians". Nowadays, the difference between "Republicans" and "Democrats" (at least among those actually in power) mostly tends to be in WHICH ways to expand Government.
Well, the last time I checked, salt is a vital element to our survival (It regulates water content, not enough and we'd all die of dehydration regardless of how much water we drank). So by removing it from public sources, are they thereby impacting at least some people's ability to get salt (IE those that do not eat much at home) and hence endangering them? Sure, excessive salt can be dangerous, but not nearly as dangerous as not enough... This sounds to me like a "That sounds bad, we should do something about it!" snap decision... Sigh...
The follow-up bill will ban that terrible menace, dihydrogen monoxide! New York cares enough to ensure that the public is kept safe from such dangerous chemical compounds!
Looks like ipv6.comcast.net has both A (IPv4) and AAAA (IPv6) records.
$ host ipv6.comcast.net
ipv6.comcast.net has address 126.96.36.199
ipv6.comcast.net has address 188.8.131.52
ipv6.comcast.net has IPv6 address 2001:558:1002:5:68:87:64:59
ipv6.comcast.net has IPv6 address 2001:558:1004:9:69:252:76:96
The reason computer chips are so small is computers don't eat much.