IObit Smart Defrag Pro 6.2.5.129 Crack + Free Activation Key 2019 IObit Smart Defrag Pro 6.2.5.129 Crack is an advanced and easy-to-use scope defragmenter that executes the slower and generally performed the best thick plate. It throws the entire structure slowly and satisfactory, and similarly, your record is seen in the reuse of the same way, speeding speed plate and general system for. IObit Smart Defrag Pro 6.2 Serial Key & Activation Code Full Free Download IObit Smart Defrag Pro 6.2 Serial Key Disk fragmentation is the main cause of slow computer. With enhanced multi-threading defrag engine and improved defrag speed, Smart Defrag provides better solution for faster data access and outstanding disk performance. Then you can enjoy. Smart defrag key. Smart Defrag 5 Pro Serial Key is a Disk Defragmenter, which accelerates the entire system with fast and powerful disk defragment. Situated on advance disk defrag engine and “Boot Time Disk Defrag” automation. It not only provides defragmentation but also intelligently centralizes your files based on using frequency, thus increases disk speed and the entire system for high performance!
Hi, I’m John Green; this is Crash CourseWorld History, and today we’re going to discuss the series of events that made itpossible for you to watch Crash Course. And also made this studio possible. And made thewarehouse containing the studio possible. A warehouse, by the way, that houses stufffor warehouses. That’s right, it’s time to talk about the Industrial Revolution. Although it occurred around the same timeas the French, American, Latin American, and Haitian Revolutions - between, say, 1750 and1850 - the industrial revolution was really the most revolutionary of the bunch. Past John: No way, dude. All those other revolutionsresulted in, like, new borders and flags and stuff. Present John: [sigh] We’ve studied 15,000years of history here at Crash Course, Me from the Past. And borders and flags havechanged plenty, and they’re going to keep changing. But in all that time, nothing much changed about the way we disposed of waste or located drinking water or acquired clothing. Most people livedon or very close to the land that provided their food. Except for a few exceptions, life expectancynever rose above 35 or below 25. Education was a privilege, not a right. In all thosemillennia, we never developed a weapon that could kill more than a couple dozen peopleat once, or a way to travel faster than horseback. For 15,000 years, most humans never ownedor used a single item made outside of their communities. Simon Bolivar didn’t change that andneither did the American Declaration of Independence. You have electricity? Industrial Revolution.Blueberries in February? Industrial Revolution. You live somewhere other than a farm? IndustrialRevolution. You drive a car? Industrial Revolution. You get twelve years of free, formal education?Industrial Revolution. Your bed, your antibiotics, your toilet, your contraception, your tapwater, your every waking and sleeping second: Industrial Revolution. [theme music] Here’s one simple statistic that sums itup: Before the industrial revolution, about 80% of the world’s population was engagedin farming to keep itself and the other 20% of people from starving. Today, in the United States,less than 1% of people list their occupation as farming. I mean, we’ve come so far that we don’teven have to farm flowers anymore. Stan, are these real, by the way? I can’t tell ifthey’re made out of foam or digital. So what happened? TECHNOLOGY! Here’s my definition: The Industrial Revolution was an increasein production brought about by the use of machines and characterized by the use of newenergy sources. Although this will soon get more complicated, for our purposes today,industrialization is NOT capitalism - although, as we will see next week, it is connectedto modern capitalism. And, the industrial revolution began around 1750 and it occurredacross most of the earth, but it started in Europe, especially Britain. What happened?Well, let’s go to the Thought Bubble. The innovations of the Industrial Revolutionwere intimately interconnected. Like, look, for instance, at the British textile industry:The invention of the flying shuttle by John Kay in 1733 dramatically increased the speedof weaving, which in turn created demand for yarn, which led to inventions like the SpinningJenny and the water frame. Soon these processes were mechanized using water power, until thesteam engine came along to make flying shuttles really fly in these huge cotton mills. The most successful steam engine was builtby Thomas “They Didn’t Name Anything After Me” Newcomen to clear water out of mines.And because water was cleared out of those mines, there was more coal to power more steamengines, which eventually led to the fancying up of the Newcomen Steam Engine by James “IGot a Unit of Power and a University Named After Me” Watt, whose engine made possiblenot only railroads and steamboats but also ever-more-efficient cotton mills. And, for the first time, chemicals other thanstale urine (I wish I was kidding) were being used to bleach the cloth that people wore- the first of which was sulfuric acid, which was created in large quantities only thanksto lead-lined chambers, which would’ve been impossible without lead production risingdramatically right around 1750 in Britain, thanks to lead foundries powered by coal. And all these factors came together to makemore yarn that could be spun and bleached faster and cheaper than ever before, a processthat would eventually culminate in $18 Crash Course Mongols shirts. Available now at DFTBA.com.Thanks, Thought Bubble, for that shameless promotion of our beautiful, high-quality t-shirtsavailable now at DFTBA.com. So, the problem here is that with industrializationbeing so deeply interconnected, it’s really difficult to figure out why it happened inEurope, especially Britain. And that question of why turns out to be one of the more contentiousdiscussions in world history today. For instance, here are some Eurocentric reasonswhy industrialization might have happened first in Europe: There’s the cultural superiorityargument that basically holds that Europeans are just better and smarter than other people.Sometimes this is formulated as Europeans possessing superior rationality. By the way,you’ll never guess where the people who make this argument tend to come from - unlessyou guessed that they come from Europe. And then, others argue that only Europe hadthe culture of science and invention that made the creation of these revolutionary technologiespossible. Another argument is that freer political institutions encouraged innovation and strongproperty rights created incentives for inventors. And, finally, people often cite Europe’ssmall population because small populations require labor-saving inventions. Oh, it’stime for the Open Letter? An Open Letter to the Steam Engine. But first,let’s see what’s in the secret compartment today. Oh, it’s a TARDIS. Truly the apexof British industrialization. Dear Steam Engine, You know what’s crazy?You’ve really never been improved upon. Like this thing, which facilitates time travel,probably runs on a steam engine. Almost all electricity around the world, whether it’sfrom coal or nuclear power, is just a steam engine. It’s all still just water and heat, andit speaks to how truly revolutionary the Industrial Revolution was that since then, it’s reallyjust been evolution. Best Wishes, John Green So, you may have heard any of those rationalesfor European industrialization, or you may have heard others. The problem with all ofthem, is that each time you think you’re at the root cause it turns out there’s acause of the root cause. To quote Leonardo DiCaprio, James Cameron, and coal mine operators,“We have to go deeper.” But, anyway, the problem with these Eurocentricwhy answers, is that they all apply to either China or India or both. And it’s reallyimportant to note that in 1800, it was not clear that Europe was going to become theworld’s dominant manufacturing power in the next hundred years. At the time, China,India, and Europe were all roughly at the same place in terms of industrial production. First, let’s look at China. It’s hardto make the European cultural superiority argument because China had been recordingits history since before Confucius, and plus there was all that bronze and painting andpoetry. It’s also kind of difficult to make a blanketstatement that China was economically inferior to Europe, since they invented paper moneyand led the world in exports of everything from silk to china. I mean, pre-IndustrialRevolution, population growth was the surest sign of economic success, and China had thebiggest population in the world. I guess that answers the question of whether they’redigital. It’s also difficult to say that China lackeda culture of invention when they invented gunpowder, and printing, and paper, and arguablycompasses. And China had more free enterprise during the Song dynasty than anywhere in theworld. Some argue that China couldn’t have freeenterprise because they had a long history of trying to impose monopolies on items likesalt and iron. And that’s true, but when it comes to enforcing those monopolies, theyalso had a long history of failure. So really, in a lot of ways, China was at least as primedfor an Industrial Revolution as Britain was. So, why didn’t it happen? Well, Europeans- specifically the British - had two huge advantages: First, Coal. When you trace thestory of improved transportation, or communication, or industrial efficiency, or better chemicalmanufacturing, it always comes back to coal, because the Industrial Revolution was all aboutusing different forms of energy to automate production. And England had large supplies of coal thatwere near the surface, which meant that it was cheap to mine, so it quickly replacedwood for heating and cooking and stuff. So that encouraged the British to look for morecoal. The only problem with coal mining, aside from it being, you know, like, deadly andeverything, is that the coal mines flooded all the time. I guess coal mining is alsoa little problematic for, like, the health of, you know, like, the planet. But, because there was all this incentiveto get more coal out of the ground, steam engines were invented to pump water out ofthe mines. And because those early steam engines were super inefficient, they needed a cheapand abundant source of fuel in order to work - namely, coal, which meant they were muchmore useful to the British than anyone else. So steam engines used cheap British coal tokeep British coal cheap, and cheap British coal created the opportunity for everythingfrom railroads to steel, which like so much else in the Industrial Revolution, createda positive feedback loop. Because they run on rails, railroads need steel. And becauseit is rather heavy, steel needs railroads. Secondly, there were Wages. Britain (and toa lesser extent the Low Countries) had the highest wages in the world at the beginningof the 18th century. In 1725, wages in London were the equivalent of 11 grams of silverper day. In Amsterdam, they were 9 grams. In Beijing, Venice, and Florence, they wereunder 4. And in Delhi, they were under 2. It’s not totally clear why wages were sohigh in Britain. Like, one argument is that the Black Death lowered population so muchthat it tightened labor markets, but that doesn’t explain why wages remained low in,like, plague-ravaged Italy. Mainly, high wages combined with cheap fuel costs meant thatit was economically efficient for manufacturers to look to machines as a way of lowering theirproduction costs. To quote the historian Robert Allen: “Wages were high and energy was cheap.These prices led directly to the industrial revolution by giving firms strong incentivesto invent technologies that substituted capital and coal for labor.” Ugh, Stan, I’m a little worried that peopleare still going to accuse me of Eurocentrism. Of course, other people will accuse me ofan anti-European bias. I don’t have a bias against Europe. I love Europe. Europe gaveme many of my favorite cheeses and cross-country skiing and Charlie Chaplin, who inspired today’sDanica drawing. Like, the fact of coal being near the surfacein Britain can’t be chalked up to British cultural superiority. But the wages questionis a little different because it makes it sound like only Europeans were smart enoughto pay high wages. But here’s one last thing to consider: Indiawas the world’s largest producer of cotton textiles, despite paying basically the lowestwages in the world. Indian agriculture was so productive that laborers could be supportedat a very low cost. And that, coupled with a large population, meant that Indian textilemanufacturing could be very productive without using machines, so they didn’t need to industrialize. But more importantly from our perspective,there’s a strong argument to be made that Indian cotton production helped spur Britishindustrialization. It was cotton textiles that drove the early Industrial Revolution,and the main reason that Britain was so eager to produce cottons was that demand was incrediblyhigh. They were more comfortable than woolens, but they were also cheaper, because cottonscould be imported from India at such a low cost. So, Indian cottons created the market andthen British manufacturers invested in machines (and imported Indian know-how) to increaseproduction so that they could compete with India. And that’s at least one way in whichEuropean industrialization was truly a world phenomenon. For those of you who enjoy suchhighly contentious and thorny, cultural historical debates, good news. Next week, we’ll betalking about capitalism. Thanks for watching, I’ll see you then. Crash Course is produced and directed by StanMuller. Our script supervisor is Danica Johnson. The show is written by my high school historyteacher, Raoul Meyer, and myself. We are ably interned by Meredith Danko. And our graphicsteam is Thought Bubble. Last week’s phrase of the week was 'TheNew England Revolution.' That was challenging. If you want to suggest future phrases of theweek or take a guess at this week's, you can do so in comments, where you can also askquestions about today’s video that will be answered by our team of historians. Thanks for watching Crash Course, and as wesay in my hometown, don't forget to be awesome.
Mar 18, 2019 This course is mostly based on the AP Chemistry curriculum, but it also covers some introductory organic chemistry. By the end of the course, you will be able to:. Utilize the fundamental tools of chemistry, including the periodic table, nomenclature, and basic lab safety techniques. A Real Player's Review of Red Chip Poker's CORE Strategy Course. “SplitSuit” Sweeney and Adam “W34z3L” Jones, with few videos from Ed Miller as well.