Creationists HAVE to have a young earth or else it breaks their religion (original sin and atonement).
More accurately, they don't understand their own holy books, their cultural context, and history. A lot of them think their holy book was written all at once, and was always a single collection, instead of the reality of their being assorted writings and stories collected together hundreds of years after the fact and canonized.
They see "six days" and take it literally, without any interest or understanding in the fact that it is a translation of a translation with centuries old grammar and idioms. Some concepts don't exist from one language to the next, and so on...
Even in English, the word "day" has multiple meanings, and they've chosen one definition and made their narrative to fit a "day" as a 24-hour period... rather than the second common definition.
So I don't blame creationists for having to believe in creationism for their religion to be valid.
The problem is one of the recurring themes of humanity: Somebody (politician, theologian, philosopher, artist) says "this is reality", without any citations/reasons/facts, and masses follow, because it's easier than thinking. It's not really a fault of religion, because we see the same behavior independent of religion.
It seems every patent troll thinks their patent should be worth billions of dollars. It also seems that some companies are deciding it is worth their dime to get the courts to evaluate an actual court-ordered value for the troll's patent, which is a fraction of anything the troll wants.
This time Troll has won a Pyrrhic victory.
Hopefully the trend will continue until trolls decide that a non-practicing entity suing over patents isn't a viable business model.
Ugh.. autocorrect strikes again. IKEv1, not KDEv1.
In a sick way, I'm pleased to see Cisco's insistence on weakening KDEv1 has bitten them. The guys working on StrongSWAN or LibreSwan have long made an issue of many of the weakness Cisco & others forced into IPSec (and IKEv1 in particular).
Not that Cisco is alone in weakening IPsec and marketing it as a desirable feature... but it's sad that anybody has to suffer due to somebody telling an engineer to take off their engineer's hat and put on his manager's hat
Don't care. I wonder how much squid I can get for 5 quid... now I'm hungry.
or is it too much for submitters to write in grown up English and not teenie language
Quid = UK equivalent of a "buck".
Agreed; unless the service costs about the same as energy (fuel/electicity) + the standard vehicle deprecation per mile (looks to be ~$0.54/mile), it'll be a very hard sell.
Even then, it would be a hard sell for my own daily commute: that works out to $7k/year for commute costs, which is 3-4x more than what I pay for over the life of a personally owned vehicle (including buying new cars, fuel, maintenance, insurance, registration, etc.)
The beauty of LIDAR is you aren't limited to visible wavelengths of light.
Infra-red is considerably better than visible wavelengths at handling smoke & fog. It may not penetrate for miles, but it will do just fine for a few hundred meters.
Ever wonder why the James Webb space telescope is infra-red? Because an IR telescope can see through gas clouds that block visible light.
I have a Chase card on Apple Pay...
It's about what retailers want consumers to use, and how they can squeeze more money from their customers. More secure standards get in the way of customer tracking, which is highly profitable.
Retailers can't track you by your credit card number with chip and EVM standards. They can with the older magstripe and CurrentC.
I know a lot of local retailers rolled out "membership cards" to track individual customers the day Credit Card companies told them to switch to using chip cards.
Later on, I think bean counters looked at the probability of losing money due to credit card fraud (a classic insurance calculation), compared it to the profits from selling their customer tracking data, and went with tracking customers for maximum revenue.
Chip readers & EVM cards were then disabled, and retailers blame the readers they can continue to track customers.
I agree; 40 years ago, who would have dreamed that the auto industry would move most their production away from Detroit? That most of the city's factories would be vacant and collapsing? We've already seen the largest company in the world go bankrupt and be purchased by the US government.
Who would have dreamed so many factories would abandon the US entirely?
In much the same way, software development and R&D may well collapse in Silicon Valley.
Nobody has a crystal ball. Diversification in a financial portfolio has always been good advice; how would it be any different for your tax base?
At the end of the day, skilled people have the freedom to move as opportunities do. Cities can't.
While Silicon Valley is in a golden age, who is to say if or when those jobs will abandon the Bay Area entirely?
Consider that Whatsapp has no information about the content of any messages sent between users, so any content within the messages that are sent cannot be harvested to generate any kind of targeted advertising, the *only* thing that they have are names and phone numbers, and who is sending messages to whom, with no basis for understanding why beyond anything that might have been communicated out of band directly to Whatsapp. So since Whatsapp has no information about its users that can be used to actually generate any kind of "improved advertising experience" for its users, the assumption that this is what they actually are trying to do cannot possibly be correct.
Do you not remember the fight against the NSA's bulk metadata collection program?
Metadata is very powerful for mass surveillance with the facade of improving advertising experiences.
I don't care whether it's a sovereign government or a corporation. Mass surveillance is wrong.
I'd mod you up if I could. It's a classic case of ready, fire, aim.
The dominant lead-free used to day is SAC - which leaches copper into the ground, and has its own environmental problems.
The bottom line is we can't fix the environmental problems of e-waste by changing the type of solder. Lead is a bit player in the toxicity of e-waste. As long as countries are allowed to ship e-waste to third world countries, you're poisoning people.
These third world countries do not have the tools to safely recycle e-waste. Making one small part of the process less toxic is a drop in the bucket compared to the overall toxin exposure.
Banning leaded solder and patting themselves on the back for "solving a global problem" shows the extent of the hubris involved.
If the EU actually cared, they'd have mandated that their e-waste couldn't be exported to countries incapable of processing them safely. The EU does have the tools and funding to recycle e-waste safely.
I thought the FCC classified them as "common carriers" now.
A point which is being contested in court, if I recall correctly...
The test of intelligent tinkering is to save all the parts. -- Aldo Leopold