cfgvjkljhgfb

15 ms·

1.
by cfgvjkljhgfb 15y ago
What is absurd is that whether you can enter or not isn't down to any rule - it's down to the particular low paid moron on the particular desk. I've been told my visa wasn't valid because there should be a blue copy instead of a red copy (h
2.
by cfgvjkljhgfb 15y ago
He was on a visa waiver - if he is British that allows him to do anything you can do on a B1 business visa. In fact the only reason you have to get a B1 visa is because you can't use the visa waiver if you are, say a convicted criminal! Y
3.
by cfgvjkljhgfb 15y ago
There are places where you can sell your bitcoins for worthless pieces of paper with pictures of dead US politician on them. It's the same process that makes pork bellies exchangeable for bits of German automotive engineering
4.
by cfgvjkljhgfb 15y ago
So by the same logic, Porsche and Ferrari should stop making gasoline powered cars with 4wheels in a race to the bottom with kia/hyundai - and switch to 6 wheel cars powered by waterwheels?
5.
by cfgvjkljhgfb 15y ago
Checked the figures and 1.3Kw is the average (24*365) for Arizona. Surprising - when I lived in Houston you needed AC running 24x7 for 6months of the year and all the other appliances where electric. I assume, being in the desert, Arizona i
6.
by cfgvjkljhgfb 15y ago
NASA was told to build something that was pointless - a LEO satelite delivery system with 7 crew. It's like being asked to design a 20 seater minivan. Then discovering your only customers are Mormon families on the school run and the Army
7.
by cfgvjkljhgfb 15y ago
Arguements about government ownership of EADS aside - the important part is that ESA is free to launch on Ariane, Soyuz, Chinese or any other rocket without it becoming a congressional matter.
8.
by cfgvjkljhgfb 15y ago
It circulated inside Nasa (and STSci) for a long time before it surfaced on the internet
9.
by cfgvjkljhgfb 15y ago
It claims 200MW/150,000 homes = 1.3KW for a US home !!!! So homes in Arizona don't have AC or electrical appliances and are all owned by eco-warriors
10.
by cfgvjkljhgfb 15y ago
The funny thing is that it's accuracy hasn't changed - which tells you all you need to know about Nasa
11.
by cfgvjkljhgfb 15y ago
They didn't have to build components at factories in 50 different states. They didn't have to include secret USAF, CIA, AAA etc requirements in the design. They had a simple goal - get payload to LEO cheaply - not a nebulous goal of 'make A
12.
by cfgvjkljhgfb 15y ago
ESA manages to launch telescopes much more complex than Hubble in spite of not owning a single rocket.
13.
by cfgvjkljhgfb 15y ago
with cuda and the cloud it's quicker to try all possible passwords (starting with aaaaaaa...) than to search a rainbow table of dictionary words so ":Hy6&z@z" is now no more secure than "password"