Ah! I was naïve.
Ah! I was naïve.
It's a diæresis, and it's English's only native diacritical mark.
You could use a tape measure or a ruler, and look at the dimensions in the product description.
But since 10" is apparently a maximum rather than (as I thought) a minimum:
There are lots of sub-$200 netbooks.
$172 for an 11.6" 1366x768 4GB/32GB with USB 2.0 and 3.0 laptop Win10 (or Linux, I suppose) on Amazon -- and that's in just the first page of Google results.
Netbooks are alive and well.
Actually, I think plain text is better than poor encryption. Poor encryption is worse than none, as it leads you to believe the communication is "secure" (and gives the marketing weasels air cover). At least with plain text, you know it's vulnerable.
No. Read up on how the Great Firewall of China works. If the client requests a secure connection, and doesn't accept a certificate signed by the State MITM Attacker (claiming to be the connection target, if necessary generated on the fly) the connection goes no further. It's actually quite simple.
It can be worked around by letting the State MITM the connection with a proxy, then using real security for the connection through the proxy. Don't get discovered, though: doing this is terrorism. And proxies as they are discovered turn into honeypots leading to more terrorists. Your continued freedom depends on the operational security of everyone using the proxy, and on luck besides.
If an an individual making a single copy of a work by a large company is $200k or so, why is a large company giving copies of a work by an individual to all comers (publishing it on the web) supposed to get a pass? Is it right? Obviously not. But this is the way the deep pockets want it, so that's the way it is.
Humans don't digest anything (except complex carbohydrates, via saliva in the mouth). Gut bacteria digest food. What is available for the host human to absorb after the bacteria are done changes significantly -- not by some little correction factor, by up to an order of magnitude -- depending on a number of factors such as food particle size, prevalence of cell walls and connective tissue, the exact ratio and distribution of gut bacteria species, and so forth, for a given "energy content" of food. (A human will typically absorb as much chemical energy from a 4-oz. medium-well hamburger patty as from a 16-oz. rare steak, and an much from a 2-oz. piece of cake as from a 6-oz hunk of black bread.)
What the human body then does with that chemical energy depends on a number of genetic, environmental, and experiential factors. Having lost a significant amount of weight lowers energy demand, permanently, by up to 30%. Food availability to the mother during gestation affects the metabolic efficiency of the offspring. Hormones and hormone analogs in _microgram_ quantities effect the efficiency and completeness of energy absorption by the gut and whether abdominal fat stores the glucose. (Subcutaneous fat responds to glucose levels, not hormone levels.) Oddly, there is a strong correlation between maternal soy consumption during pregnancy and non-obese offspring: but then soy is an estrogen mimic. Most plastics also shed endocrine mimics.
The "fuel" model of food is overly simplistic. The conflation of extreme overweight and obesity is overly simplistic (yes, obese people can diet and exercise to normal weight -- 5% of the time; the other 95%, other mechanisms keep the fat from turning into energy). The worldwide obesity crisis cannot be solved by diet, exercise, and willpower, because it is not caused by overeating, lack of exercise, and self-indulgence. _Overweight_ can be so addressed; obesity cannot.
"The only way for a reporter to look at a politician is down." -- H.L. Mencken