Surprised no-one mentioned this:
Surprised no-one mentioned this:
Just they wait until I release my Adblocker blocker blocker app. Then you'll be able to see the site again. At least until they deploy an Adblocker blocker blocker blocker which I guess will be inevitable.. However I have an idea about how to deal with that...
The scanning speed is one thing, the processing speed of the scanned files is another. I haven't tried this new system (obviously) but the Fujitsu is certainly pretty slow.
There are a lot of things that simply aren't available on ebooks. And if I purchased the book and I'm using the pdf for my own use then it's not piracy. At least it's not morally wrong to me, and that's the only thing that matters as far as I am concerned.
I've had one of these for quite some time now, and it looks pretty much the same except more expensive and without the foot pedal option (great idea!)
The important thing is the software rather than the hardware which is meant to be able to detect the curvature of the pages on a bound book and adjust for it. It sort of works most of the time on the SV600 but it's not especially fast and neither is it entirely reliable.
I gave up on it mostly because the software for the Mac was pretty unreliable. I do note they release updates for it very regularly so maybe I should try it again as I haven't touched it in over half a year.
Nicely played Mr/Ms Harpoon Lampshade.... nicely played
I did some basic stats on this.
There are in Canada about 11 suicides per 100,000 people per year. The Ashley Madison list contains 33 million names. So, on an average year with 33 million random people there are over 3,600 suicides, equating to 10 per day (based on Canadian stats)
So these 2 are well within normal expected rates of suicide for this size of a group. Unless I've bollocked up my stats somewhere in which case please tell me.
So, you put a video online that someone else made, onto a service that someone else pays the bandwidth fees for and you're bitching because you aren't getting any money from it?
What exactly do you think your ten minutes of time in downloading the video from one place and uploading it to another are worth?
Such as "shooting in portrait"
Well.. sorry to say this but this particular advanced and complex technique has been used by every idiot with a smartphone recording videos for years.
Also... 6k video scaled up isn't 8k. it's 6k video with some random pixels thrown in for marketing reasons.
If they start doing this they better beware, there's never been a better reason for Google/Apple etc to get into the carrier business themselves.
This reminds me of a question I had about securing a linux server.
We all know it's quite good practice to move the SSH connection from port 22 to some arbitrary high port. But of course if attacker finds nothing on port 22 he's just going to start port scanning until he gets it.
Way better would be for port 22 to respond as a valid SSH server but to reject ALL username and password combinations EVEN THE CORRECT ONES.
Only drawback I can see is when I forget I moved the SSH port and get confused when my password doesn't work. But apart from that...
This seems so obvious that I am sure something already exists to do this. Sadly my primitive google-fu didn't find it.
Firefox's market share has been dropping ever since the new UI was introduced.
Actually, Firefox's market share has been dropping ever since the Christchurch, New Zealand Earthquake.
I'm not saying you're wrong about being able to select, say, 7.1 - but that's not how the Mohs system works, even if some people occasionally think that it is.
You're wrong in two different ways, which I kind of admire
Firstly, you have something that is between 7 and 8, so for arguments sake you call that '7 and a half' (this is regularly done).
Then you take another sample, and that scratches the '7 and a half' pieces, and not the 8, so it's between 7 and a half and 8. But that's a completely different scenario to arbitrarily assigning a '7.7'
There is another method of measuring hardness, the vicker's system which does indeed follow a linear scale, so you could potentially use the vicker's hardness of the specimens to determine an approximate decimal value for the hardness of your chosen sample. But that's completely stupid because the whole POINT of this is to show a relative hardness between two samples, ie to be able to measure it by scratching one piece against another. So my comment stands, the '7.7' value is pulled out of someone's ass and has no scientific merit.
The second problem is you then compare with software revision numbers... which are of course numbers pulled entirely out of someone's ass. And of course, version 5.9 is usually less than version 5.10 etc. so again you have no way of saying 'version 5.5 is about half way between version 5.0 and version 6.0 in features.'
Base 8 is just like base 10, if you are missing two fingers. -- Tom Lehrer