If your diet is exclusively protein and fiber then your maximum possible caloric intake is very low and how protein intake behaves when you are above maintenance levels is obviously not relevant to you.
The CPU in the Falcon was also clocked higher (available in 16 MHz or 25 Mhz)
was limited by a 16-bit bus. A stock Amiga 1200's 68EC020 ran at 14 Mhz and did have a 32-bit bus was limited by having only "Chip RAM" (shared with custom chips).
The DSP was a difference though, for raw calculations.
I think it might have been NeXT machines that had started the trend of having a DSP.
Commodore had built a prototype of the Amiga 3000 with a DSP in it which was talked about at the time but it was never released. Amiga enthusiasts have only recreated DSP boards in more recent years.
On the Amiga, the various DMA devices such as the blitter, sprites, audio, disk, video could effectively steal cycles from CPU. I believe the original ST didnt have a blitter. Did the CPU on the ST suffer the same problems when it got its blitter and received higher resolutions ?
- Time is strictly perceptual. The Universe as a whole (including changes in the fourth dimension) has always existed and will always exist. There is no 'end of time'.
- When your portion of the universe runs out (death) you just rerun it again. Because linear time is an illusion that helps us make sense of it (and not fear the future) and in reality we're skipping all over the place constantly. Forever. So hope your life isn't terrible. You're going to be reliving it infinitely. Enjoy.
Which is fine, but you could just use it to fix your vocal track
I teach recording, mixing and mastering and I know it's tedious but all of it is very creative and there's art in the imperfections. Sanitizing it away may make it more appealing to the 'average' listener but you won't get actual fans that way.
I specified mountainous terrain but it can only seem to create a flat park, which is a little boring and more like Theme Park World than Roller Coaster Tycoon.
> While the Supreme Court has long recognized a border-search exception to the Fourth Amendment’s warrant requirement, it applies to only two interests: promoting the duty regime and preventing contraband from entering the country; and ensuring that individuals are legally admitted. The government’s recent use of the exception goes substantially beyond these matters.
None of these two interests apply to his targeted search. No duty applies here. By definition, no contraband can exist on an erased phone.
The Supreme Court has long recognized a border-search exception to the Fourth Amendment’s warrant requirement. In United States v. Flores-Montano, the Court looked to the nation’s sovereign “interest in protecting . . . its territorial integrity” to justify such searches.3 In United States v. Montoya de Hernandez, the Court stated, somewhat more narrowly, that Congress is the source of the executive’s power. It explained that “[s]ince the founding of our Republic . . . [Congress has] granted the Executive plenary authority to conduct routine searches and seizures at the border, without probable cause or a warrant.” The Commerce Clause permits Congress to authorize the seizure of goods at the border.
> While the Supreme Court has long recognized a border-search exception to the Fourth Amendment’s warrant requirement, it applies to only two interests: promoting the duty regime and preventing contraband from entering the country; and ensuring that individuals are legally admitted.
The only reasons allowed for border searches are ensuring that individuals are legally admitted (inapplicable here because citizens are always legally entitled to enter) and preventing contraband from entering.
A wiped phone can't contain contraband, so wiping the phone serves the same purpose as a search. It's not destroying evidence anymore than throwing away a water bottle before going through TSA is destroying evidence.
> A wiped phone can't contain contraband, so wiping the phone serves the same purpose as a search.
While this is the most compelling argument I've seen surrounding this case and this specific context, the initial attempt to enter with the contraband is likely a crime on its own - partial entry has already happened, the acts in question happened on US soil.
Imagine applying the same concept to drugs (and "body is a container" was found unconstitutional long ago, so no need to opine there) - if you're subject to a search and you eat drugs, does that somehow absolve you of the original attempt to smuggle?
In general, there is not. For the border search exemption to allow a warrantless search of a citizen, the only legitimate grounds are preventing countraband from entering the country.
this is a nonsense statement. yes, unfortunately format logic is wholly inadequate to express what we need in the creation and application of laws. so yes, fuzzy issues about the intent of the law and the intent of the accused some into play, along with a healthy schmear of cultural norms.
but to say that the laws and precedence aren't largely concerned with building some semantic context, and that lawyers don't build chains of reasoning in that framework to prophet their positions is absolute nonsense.
you're positing a world where a judge just rules entirely on feels, and I think most judges would be quite offended by that notion.
Sure lawyers rely on semantics. But I said “silly semantics”.
Claiming that destroying evidence of a crime proves no crime was committed is the logic of a 1 year old who thinks the world disappears when they close their eyes.
A lawyer can go into court and argue semantics around the edges but isn’t going to get very far using semantics to argue destroying evidence also erases a crime.
The border search exemption can't be used for general purpose law enforcement; only for determining if the person should be allowed to enter the country (inapplicable to citizens) and for preventing countraband from entering the country.
A wiped phone cannot contain contraband data, so the border search exemption cannot apply.
I see a vast gulf between searching a truck of produce driven by a non-citizen vs intercepting a citizen at the boarder with known affiliations with the opposing political party.
And it's impossible to ignore that context. This is plainly wrong. And people trying to justify this plainly fascist search is sickening.
Uh what? No. LOL.
I eat crazy amounts of protein, it's almost all of my diet outside of fibre and I've lost 120 pounds and now sit in the bottom of my BMI bracket.