Captain, we’re going to need a new tactic. Operative 15 has found a gaping flaw in our capabilities.
Captain, we’re going to need a new tactic. Operative 15 has found a gaping flaw in our capabilities.
It’s a monarchy… So yeah…
Is this the same Bob Ballard that found the Titanic and the Bismark?
I agree, we all have search engines and if someone doesn’t understand a word or phrase they can learn it on their own. Brilliant write up!
Looks like forced perspective. I think the hawk isn’t looking at the little bird, but from our angle it looks like they’re face to face, so we assume they are much closer than they are.
It will be very difficult for someone over the internet to help you troubleshoot without some type of schematic of what you’re trying to accomplish.
Certainly could if it had good contact. If it was air gapped (held up by hair), it could be an effective barrier for shorter wavelengths.
I took some antenna theory courses back in the day and yes, you are correct. Some frequencies reflect off the upper atmosphere so there would be a longer effective range at higher incident angles (going into the top of the head) but it wouldn’t completely block radio waves. Going from memory, the wavelengths that reflect off the upper atmosphere are long enough that a tin foil hat wouldn’t cause much interference anyways.
TLDR: Fashionable, but not practical.
It is a politically savvy and ethically correct move. Really nice when those line up.
The argument I’m making is that we should not call them chemicals when they don’t have the capacity to make chemical reactions.
An analogy could be how we use the word weed. We call unwanted plants weeds. If there is mint growing in your yard and you don’t want it, it’s a weed. If you sell your house and the next owner likes it that mint is not a weed anymore. It’s still mint (element) but no longer a weed (chemical).
You make a good point. I should have said “things in the plasma state” should not be considered chemicals.
Hydrogen and Helium are elements, I guess it depends on what your definition of a chemical is.
The reason I’m saying plasma is not a chemical is because it is too energetic to make atom to atom bonds which I feel is the basis for chemistry. If something cannot interact chemically I feel we should not consider it a chemical.
Please note that I did not look up any formal definitions, just expressing my reasoning for my argument. (Aka I’m probably wrong).
I think plasma isn’t a chemical since the elements can’t form molecules. So the sun and lightning aren’t chemicals.
Hard to tell if this is a proposal to fight over hardware or an offer for free stuff.
I choose to believe the former because it makes me chuckle more.
What is the easiest way to look that information up?
Can someone provide a summary on what this means? I thought there were malicious exploits in this. Why is it back up and the perpetrator unbanned?
Personally I think the biggest hurdle will be moderation and defederation as it pertains to the first amendment. I believe there was already a supreme Court case where blocking a user on Twitter (from an official govt account) was deemed unconstitutional. This precedent might mean a govt instance is not allowed to defederate with any other server unless they defederate with all(?) This is pure speculation on my part, but I can guarantee it would go to the courts.
There’s no way this is real…
The Christian Old Testament and the Jewish Tenakh are basically the same book. “Useful Charts” has a great 7 part series about who wrote the Bible that I found fascinating as a non-believer. The book has so much influence over today’s society that I think it’s good to understand more about it even if isn’t spiritually significant to you.
I mean, even with a union, if a company crumbles the laborers are out of a job.