Doctors Bird Mask Black Plague

The white spot that was somewhere else

The German Telekom has now called in the north-west of Brandenburg Kyritz the first transmission tower of a new mobile technology, "LTE" built up. The city of just 10,000 inhabitants was the rest of the country probably now either totally unknown or the name is in the context of the Action at once fallen, the area as Kyritz-Ruppin Heathland to include this Place is named. Is correspondingly low level of knowledge about the place, which apparently pulls well into the IT professional journalists - namely, one reads the lovely phrase "a blank spot on the broadband map" shall be deleted in various places. If you ask even the locals, it is contrary to all expectation on the Internet, you will be amazed: In the inner city, there are 6 in the peripheral areas 2Mbit DSL. And somewhere there is also just a VDSL but so far built only 16MBit - a white spot is nothingness. reads

quite different then the message at H: This is from the west in the adjacent municipality with 3700 inhabitants Gumtow the speech. Here we experience the classic DSL problem where VDSL is the one place and can look forward to the suburban marsh DSL. Apparently it is upgrade (not only) for the telecom profitable, a center from 6 to 16 or even 52 Mbit as suburbs to provide at all ... Am I the only one who thinks this is not real, and it especially pretty stupid place? There

A few more questions there: Apparently, there are no devices (in Sweden but certainly, incompatible standards?), Prices do not want the telecom call, but "depending on the equipment prices" (sic) set and the Bandwidth is only 2Mbit the speech. That would be less than UMTS, but apparently is meant the "Expected bandwidth per customer "- but in how many customers, is it not, certainly not at 3700 ... Since, then, is still a white spot, namely in the information value of the item

Miosotis, Milena, Cop

The stone on the way towards smaller PCs

IT is defined so traditionally the way to. . increasingly integrated components that extent would the PCs, too - especially as the power increases faster than demand for it - are getting smaller for some special equipment, this is certainly true (just think of the first laptops in comparison to a current Netbook, or even smartphone. !), but the "normal" PC not a piece is smaller. Smaller motherboard formats it entirely, but they remain in practice without much Effect on the box dimensions. Of the 1,500 cases that knows the miser database so has only 1 / 3 volume of less than 30L. Greater the original PC was not. With less than 20L land then just 86 entries (1 / 17 of the offer). In contrast, nettops move between 1 and 5L.

While that is a motherboard show today sometimes only a fraction of the previous square (30 * 24cm with ATX on 17 * 17cm for ITX) and expansion cards are only used in exceptional cases, all other components of an inch now smaller than in the invention of the PC in the mid 1980s.

Starting with the inevitable part, the power supply. There are the ubiquitous ATX standard, with the power supply is only about as big as a continuous form of special components nettop. While there are some minor standards (SFX and TFX), but really bring what they do not, but they limit the range of possible power supplies same time greatly upon which a technology with the simplest ATX models. Looking at the size of external power supplies for notebook computers or net-tops on (which there are quite up to 120W), it is clear that there would be a lot less - because here but there is no standard, manufacturers of small enclosures rely on self-development with mostly unknown quality or equal to external solutions including a converter board in the case. The latter solution gives it a "Pico-PSU for hobbyists, but at this crazy price.

For hard drives and optical drives can save with the handle in the notebook department a lot of space. The optical drive remains as down-limiting factor of the width of device (a CD / DVD / BluRay is what it is 12cm in size) were obtained, no matter how close it is otherwise built. Again, the compact drives also have various disadvantages of slower than more expensive to less readily available.

expansion cards you need today, as I said, only for special tasks such as TV-in, or if the number of connections is not sufficient. Once a Video card is to be used, it's over with "compact" anyway. 2 slots occupy the same time that is a matter of course, only a tiny minority there is content with one. Now Is the case designed for only one slot (as in the ITX standard practice), is a graphics card so that de facto excluded. Meanwhile, the small housing are then thought of sometimes for Mini-DTX, which means a longer slot. Boards who have actually 2 slots are probably the same reason then not to be found in the trade.

here is also quite clear it will look like the majority of PCs in 10 years: The technology comes from what are today's laptops (already there are the numbers bigger!) and by analogy, the hardware expandability limited to external devices, RAM, and a new hard drive. Only the freaks will continue working on cards and removable power supplies, whose numbers have but not really important anymore.

Kumar-escape From Guantanamo Bay Bottomless

deletions on Wikipedia

me to say at this point even know how to most effectively the deletion of a self-created article on Wikipedia can be avoided.

For this you need to understand the first time the erase procedure. A delete request can not and should make everyone, even unregistered users. The latter and newcomers should not do but the main activity, because "professional extinguisher" in WP are now seen reluctantly, the two old-established ("white beer" and "access control") are probably here for one of deterrence, on the other hand have a certain grandfathering. Such a deletion debate is now ending in four types: The article is retained or deleted, respectively, or after a short week. Overall, the survival chance of a proposed article for deletion moves for years around 50%, if not now even higher. If the deletion request patent nonsense (extreme example, someone wants to delete the article on Angela Merkel due to irrelevance), the request is flying out fast - then called at Wikipedia " LAE (deletion request withdrawn). If the item is patent nonsense (An alleged "Internet celebrity" with 0 Google hits is probably a fake) will be deleted immediately. Similarly, there are many issues for large databases, in which the topic as "existence proof" should be mentioned. The same is true even if no evidence is seen that the issue could be relevant. A happy times occurring case would be about a sports club, on the stands beautifully in it, that he is playing in some meaningless league football (are those plants it in heaps and would not be relevant), forget was, however, that the department was in table tennis German champion . Something like this is of course dependent also fix deleted if it is not a previously noted - all of that is " SLA to LA ', and so" speedy deletion request for deletion request "(or better: clear deletion discussion). Here we already notice that it also has the "SLA" (speedy deletion request ") are alone, that's it (stinks My table neighbor") for the obvious nonsense, but also for "articles" that consist of only a sentence fragment or where the applicant is sure that the article is nothing! Appeals should be quick there, directly below the request and justified. For processing after a week of the articles, that will maintain the matter is not so clear , and that is where the author can save something.

The main issue is to meet the criteria of relevance by the article. These criteria are not always quite logical, so you as the best one even looks clean. The relevance of this is met, of course, are also in the article, because no one can see light and the whole is usually the most important information anyway. "Angela Merkel is a physicist studying." more interested few, "Angela Merkel German Chancellor is." however, clearly defines the relevance and delivers you right now the most important statement to the person. Often (especially in business articles!), It is important that the relevance of features by either an independent or can be proven legally committed to the truth source. The famous phrase "global leader" of one's own website leads rather than advertising for speedy deletion; write something but a national daily newspaper about the company, things look very different. Otherwise, it is very conducive to the deletion debate read once, in particular the rationale for the application and any further justification "delete" comments. From this it can be seen very quickly what you have to change the article and whether or not it is probably also possible simply to save the article because the topic just really is not relevant.

The analysis of deletion requests within a week is subject to the supplied arguments and not by the number of those who write "delete" or "Keep". If the application text is "irrelevant" and 30 people there write under it "keep pretty picture," of course deleted anyway, the other way the article will retain but also the consent of all 30 to the applicant, but after 3 days of a coming "ehy, the guy was once a minister in XY! " (With supporting documents, of course, there are also biscuits joke there). Somewhere in between, then the area in which the evaluating Admin takes a cube (as seen by the admins recommends it, so to justify a decision then, the admission the dice would be detrimental to their own reputation). If you think that the admin has chosen as total cheese, speak to him and tell him what argument he is to have you there to see now - the whole thing applies in both directions. If one has the impression talking to a wall here, there is some point even the fire test as statutory authority. Nothing is decided again, but only checks the decision. Unlike in court but we must also bring in new arguments and to point in an extreme case to even a change in facts.

A few taboo arguments for deletion discussions, it also:

• "It was but an article in 10 other languages!" (Create some advertising spammers up to 20, just translated by machine.)
• "But Amazon.de also has an article, why could not my planned shop?" (Self-explanatory, right?)
• true evil, the variant is "completely unknown bands, but the X and Y have an article!" (Because it could well be that these two very soon have no article, because they have been simply overlooked)
• Any arguments in the direction of deletion is stupid anyway "are ignored. The deletion site is not for policy discussions there.

On safest calm before the whole Löschgekaspere, although it was clear from the article is so clear why this article is here that this must also understand the people who do not understand it really. This includes besides a mention of the relevance feature the best in the first sentence and a possible use preferably of different individual evidence of bodies that would even know a complete offline.

Milking Gay Men Cocks

electric cars soon to avoid without much battery costs?

So far in addition to the range, the cost of the battery, the biggest argument against electric cars. If the battery is not to be terribly small, there are fast times 10,000 € away. The savings compared to a car with combustion engine are comparatively tiny, so that the car is actually much more expensive.

is now, however, the development of a battery been announced without having any serious drawbacks, 85% is to save these costs - in other words: A battery in current standard size so will cost only € 1500. Or you invest more money and therefore has a much coverage ... The problem is that the hook, reveals that the manufacturer has not been to some extent, how it will work. The fact that the development is not effective by the company behind it A123Systems , but is a spin-off called regulated "24M", raises the suspicion that one of the success here is not so sure. After all, this spin-off now, but 16 million U.S. dollars available, we therefore hope that they can perform the miracle really.

Best Welded Deep V Aluminum Boats

Street View - what you see then?

If you look at the debate looks to Google's Street View once you get the impression that after the fall of the " Valley of the Clueless " resolved not, but simply extended to the entire country had ... The assumption Google wants to publish what appears to be somewhere in the range of real-time video from anywhere in the world, including one's own front yard with a combination of all someone somewhere only collected data including at least giving all the homes (of course searchable) and probably move even their income or medical data. If this were true, I would understand all the protests, even! And that completely! And I would support them!

There's just one problem: This idea is complete nonsense!

what Google shows us here, and how the example of various cities and towns in several countries already, is something else entirely. Rather, it is simply about from the roof taken round eyes, that camera positions at a distance of approximately 10m in most areas, but may also have a lot more. In these photos can be hardly Road signs read (not least because the automatic pixelation anyway responds to all possible structures). Specifically, I have a model just a recording on the north side of the Cathedral of Utrecht (who wants to know: Corner Domstraat / Voetiusstraat). The picture has not quite fill the screen resolution (if it is not even stretched it already, because it is in further enlargement very quickly pixelated) and similarly low, as would a 2MPix phone photo from this perspective - if not less, particularly Unfortunately, the upper part of the tower shown very blurred. The pixelation incidentally caught not only faces and features, but suggests here and there also times when traffic signs, car rims and other similar parts to.

short: Who wants to ban Google Street View, it has not seen either or apparently had intended to prohibit general outdoor photos. Or he just wants to stir up with a senseless panic any fear ...