Slashdot Mirror

That's "alluded" not "eluded" https://www.diffen.com/difference/Allude_vs_Elude/ but anyway, the idea goes back at least as far as Olaf Stapledon
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dyson_sphere

A Dyson sphere is a hypothetical megastructure that completely encompasses a star and captures a large percentage of its power output ... Building structures encircling a star would enable a civilization to harvest far more energy.

The first contemporary description of the structure was by Olaf Stapledon in his science fiction novel Star Maker (1937)

Don't you mean "morals"? "Ethics" is another thing...

Bubble vs. Ponzi Scheme

Who was it that once said, there's a sucker born every minute?

Nope.. I'm afraid that thinkwaitfast was correct. It's a republic (a representative one) rather than a democracy - at least in the technical sense. Two things keep it from being a democracy:

1. Not everyone has the right to vote.
2. There is a constitutional limit placed upon the majority will. As a result, the government representing the majority vote is unable to necessarily enact their will if doing so violates the constitution.

The differences are subtle, though, in modern democratic republics:

https://www.diffen.com/differe...
https://keydifferences.com/dif...

I think your second link isn't as reputable as you think it is:

Basis for Comparison | Democracy | Republic
Revenue through | Illegitimate taxes, fees, fines and licenses | Legitimate taxes and fees

More realistically Republic vs Democracy is a bit of a pointless argument since there aren't firm definitions for either, at least not as they apply in the modern world.

Every state has some sort of constitution, most have elections, and all those elections have at least some restrictions on who can vote, even if it is just 'a citizen who is of majority age'.

Republic is generally thought to be a bit more restrictive since Democracy (the Greeks) came first and the Roman Republic followed. In modern times places that call themselves Republics seem to place more emphasis on the Executive/President role while Democracies focus on the legislative leader (the Prime Minister).

Nope.. I'm afraid that thinkwaitfast was correct. It's a republic (a representative one) rather than a democracy - at least in the technical sense. Two things keep it from being a democracy:

1. Not everyone has the right to vote.
2. There is a constitutional limit placed upon the majority will. As a result, the government representing the majority vote is unable to necessarily enact their will if doing so violates the constitution.

The differences are subtle, though, in modern democratic republics:

https://www.diffen.com/differe...
https://keydifferences.com/dif...

> Skeuomorphic design is stupid and childish.

There is a name for myopic people who assumes their religion is "best" for everyone; their immature "my way is the only way" mentality is called a cult.

The *proper* solution is to give users a **choice** -- because good style is subjective.

Naturally, that begs the question, what is good? We'll get to that in a second.

Some people think this bookshelf is absolutely beautiful. Compare and contrast to the "modern" version which is bland and boring. All sense of charm, and uniqueness is flushed down the crapper -- Amazon, Apple, Google, and Microsoft now all look the same. **Yawn**

I'm not the only one who hates the flat button look. All these modern designs look the same -- bland. Skeuomorphism matches what a real calculator looks like -- and you can pry my HP48SX from my cold, dead hands, thank-you very much.

Again, the best decision would be to match what users prefer. Some prefer the former, others prefer the latter. BOTH choices are OK. But designers love to pretend that they know better -- and shove their crap down my throat regardless if I like it or not.

Personally, I find antiskeuomorphism design to be dumb and gaudy -- as there no context for what is foreground and background. Congratulations, you've removed all signal and just made everything noise!. How is completely over-loading the user with noise helping them???

Maybe you prefer the gaudy, boxy design of Windows 1, er, Windows 8, but many people sure don't.

UI should be about empowering users -- NOT "let's make everything look bland, sterile, gaudy, lifeless and make me want to gouge my eyes out" because that's what modern UI has become. A clusterfuck of visual vomit.

IMO skeuomorphism is like spice

* Too much and you get indigestion.
* Too little and everything is "flat" and lacking.

I also disagree that "flat design" is skeuomorphic but that is a topic for another day.

--
Henry Poincare derived the e=mc^2 Mass-Energy equivalence 5 years earlier before Einstein. Einstein also abbreviated it as a linear equation instead of an infinite series.

From http://www.diffen.com/differen... : Tcp = slower, more work for socket connection, larger headers + more fields etc.

* This means MORE charging of RAM cells, more work & yes - that means more CPU + Power used too!

APK

P.S.=> You can't win: You're doing more work PROVING your "fix" = inefficient & again - it doesn't solve all the other NUMEROUS SECURITY ISSUES DNS HAS - hosts solves that by avoiding DNS a good 95++% of the time by using hardcoded favorites @ THE TOP OF HOSTS instantly resolving cached in RAM operating @ kernelmode speed of the IP stack itself (a highly priveleged subsystem)... apk

Maxo-texas said "All he had to have was one AR weapon and 4 magazines and you'd be looking at 280 dead instead of 80 dead. And he would have probably killed several more police officers too.

Automated cars would prevent terrorism however. Builtin pedestrarian avoidance. Make it impossible to run over a pedestrian and impossible to move if sensors are blinded and automatic wifi-reporting when a vehicle is put in to service mode (it better be at a recognized service location) and constant wifi reporting (if a vehicle goes dark, it becomes suspicious on police checks).

AR type weapons can maintained a sustained rate of fire (including magazine swaps) of 30 shots per 22 seconds while hitting targets smaller than human torsos with a near 100% accuracy rate. Check out the gun enthusiast real time comparison of AR 15 to AK 47 (on youtube). There's a reason NATO declared the AR15 a more effective fighting weapon. Lighter bullets, less kick (you can put it against your nose and pull the trigger without injury also on youtube) means you higher number of bullets (and 5's are fine to kill you. You don't need 7's)."

---

How about another actor maintaining over 1 shot per second with accuracy on targets as small as a bowling pin after 4 months training. Note: This is a mixture of AR like weapons, shotguns, and handguns.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

The effective range of AR-15 is over 400 yards fired semi-automatic.
http://www.diffen.com/differen...

That means with decent training and no exceptional skill you can hit everything you shoot at under 100' away.

Summary: The death count (especially among the police officers) could have been much much higher if the person owned a modern AR type rifle and spent a few months training to use it and swap magazines.

For that fact, probably most people lack the ability to understand cause and effect beyond what is clearly spelled out to them at the given time in the given context.

I have to disagree. Our problem is the casual voter. It's not that they're stupid. It's that they simply don't care to put in the effort. They want to spend no more than 5 minutes thinking about who to elect. There are polls that show huge numbers of people are still undecided going into the voting booth . The end result may be the same as a stupid voter -- a stupid decision and a terrible elected leader. However, the root cause isn't stupidity; it's apathy. This is an important distinction, because it opens up other solutions.

The system is completely flawed, but there's no alternative. mass stupidity represents the wide scale human species.We have no way to limit the vast scope of stupid and we can't cure it and we can't leave stupid unrepresented because they do in fact represent the majority.

We already have a better process for picking the President -- the caucus. In a primary, a person shows up and checks a box -- in and out in 5 minutes; this is very conducive to the casual voter. To the contrary, in a caucus, people vote for delegates who advocate for a candidate. This means you have to learn a little something about the candidates, and carry on an intelligent conversation about them (or else you look like a fool). It's a more involved process that could take 1-2 hours. The caucus is much more conducive to the thoughtful voter, and you get a higher caliber of voter from it. (For an in-depth comparison, see Caucus vs. Primary)

Primary vs Caucus explains the huge difference in results between Iowa and New Hampshire. Trump supporters are casual voters, who can't be bothered to show up, so he came in second in the Iowa caucus. Well, government goes to those who show up. If Trump supporters want to screen themselves out by choosing not to show up, I have no problem with that. (It's also much better than a top-down approach of screening out who can vote.) If you want a better process, get states to switch from Primary to Caucus.

For all other elected offices, use a Instant Runoff Voting. So many people complain about poor choices, but when they get more than two choices, these same people complain that they want to vote for someone who will win. If we had Instant Runoff Voting, people would rank their choices. If their choice came in last, their vote would roll to their second choice. Rinse and repeat until someone has a majority. It would free up people to vote for whomever they chose, while still giving them a vote if their first choice didn't do well.

> Disneyland/Disneyworld, whatever.

Yes. Not like they're thousands of miles away from each other, right?

They're obviously the same thing, kind of like Slashdot and SoylentNews.

"Capitalist societies also lifted billions out of poverty while socialism killed 100 million."

Socialism != communism

http://www.diffen.com/differen...

Socialist countries have healthcare freely available to their entire population and social services protecting the disadvantaged and giving everyone a fair shot at life. The US isn't anywhere close to those levels of social support.

No one's said a word (yet) about the difference in resistance losses between AC and DC when you try to transmit it over any significant distance at all.

http://www.diffen.com/differen...

If you want to give up almost all of your electrical uses in your home or business, feel free: switch to DC. Otherwise, I wouldn't suggest it. If you think those AC losses are significant, they don't hold a candle (heh) to DC.

Yes, capitalism allows, in theory, for workers to own the means of production. In practice it doesn't work out that way. In the US "the 99%" owns, collectively, only about 1% of stock

This isn't remotely close to true, the total of IRA and defined contribution plan (401k and similar) plan holdings in Q4 2014 totaled $14.2T, over half the total value of the combined NYSE at $16.6T, and NASDAQ at $8.5T. While the 1% hold some of the value in those two categories they are both limited in their total annual contribution amounts so it's actually much less skewed than the overall wealth holdings.

Exactly! With one DisplayPort I can output to two HDMI ports. DisplayPort has double the bandwidth of HDMI so I can literally run two HDMI monitors on one port without degrading the signal. Add to that DisplayPort is royalty free and HDMI is not.

They always copy the interface of the most popular competition - that's how they got started remember? They want the interface to feel familiar when someone switches. It's what's under the surface which is different:

http://www.diffen.com/differen... (slightly out of date)

http://www.ghacks.net/2014/01/... - excellent analysis imo

Most importantly Firefox is MPL vs Google ToS. That alone is worth it for me.

Actually, empathy have many different layers. A purely intellectual empathy is a lesser empathy. "Knowing" the emotions of others (often because one has "been in their shoes") is a higher form of empathy.

Some people when confronted by pain, will seek to inflict the same in others.
Others see the futileness of projecting their own pain onto others, and thus seeks to alleviate the same pain in others.
The more mature strive to make society avoid decisions leading to pain.
The most mature strive to make society strive for happiness and wholesomeness.

How compassion can have a provable biological root: See "mirror cells" in the brain
Psychopaths often tend to lack these mirror cells, but can use their intellect to understand others' feelings without being conflicted by emotions.

Your understanding is limited: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/empathy

Empathy is a precondition for compassion, which is the highest feeling a human being can feel, when it is perfectly balanced.
Sympathy is actually weaker, as it is often purely intellectual; http://www.diffen.com/difference/Empathy_vs_Sympathy

I used my own words here, but links on the net will back them up.

Captcha: teacher ;-)

No, they'll be affected.

The "rules" are the rules, be they right or be they wrong.

The objection you raise seems formally to be against the poster's ETHICS (... recognized rules of conduct...) rather than
"morality" (...according to an individuals' ideals and principles. ) http://www.diffen.com/difference/Ethics_vs_Morals

You have no particular charter to decide what someone else's 'moral obligations' might be. I find this apparent presumption ...rather appalling.

(This is intended to be NOT sarcastic:) The above aside, as a please accept sincere appreciation for your effort to provide useful feedback to students.

You're confusing "hypothesis" with "theory":

A hypothesis is either a suggested explanation for an observable phenomenon, or a reasoned prediction of a possible causal correlation among multiple phenomena. In science, a theory is a tested, well-substantiated, unifying explanation for a set of verified, proven hypotheses. A theory is always backed by evidence; a hypothesis is only a suggested possible outcome, and is testable and falsifiable.

At best, Creationism is a hypothesis.

Nevertheless; I find it horrific that a myth created by an Iron Age people, thousands of years before science even existed, is even taken seriously by anyone in this day and age. It shows how science education has failed in our society and how well the religious fundamentalists have done in warping politics - especially among the Republicans. It's of no surprise that it was a Republican who put this bill forward.

The Republican party is their own worst enemy and I miss the days before Reagan - the son of a bitch who ruined the party.

Morals are internal to the perceiving individual. Ethics are applied by an external force.

Please do some research before assuming they're synonymous. We have different words for a reason.

http://www.diffen.com/difference/Ethics_vs_Morals

Many of the critics of the theory of evolution fall into the trap of misunderstanding the definitions of 'theory' and 'hypothesis'

Scientific Theory (from http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/scientific+theory:)
"scientific theory
noun
a theory that explains scientific observations; 'scientific theories must be falsifiable'"

Theory (from http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/theory?s=t:)
"theory [thee-uh-ree, theer-ee] Show IPA
noun, plural theories.
1.
a coherent group of tested general propositions, commonly regarded as correct, that can be used as principles of explanation and prediction for a class of phenomena: Einstein's theory of relativity. Synonyms: principle, law, doctrine."

Hypothesis (from http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/hypothesis:)
"hypothesis [hahy-poth-uh-sis, hi-] Show IPA
noun, plural hypotheses [hahy-poth-uh-seez, hi-] Show IPA .
1.
a proposition, or set of propositions, set forth as an explanation for the occurrence of some specified group of phenomena, either asserted merely as a provisional conjecture to guide investigation (working hypothesis) or accepted as highly probable in the light of established facts."

Here's where things become more interesting:
Scientific Theory (from http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/scientific+theory:)
"scientific theory
noun
a theory that explains scientific observations; 'scientific theories must be falsifiable'"

So, a scientific theory must not only explain the phenomenon, but also be well supported by empirical evidence and experimentation and be falsifiable yet proven. A hypothesis, on the other hand, is only a proposed explanation for given observations.

Here's a nice comparison between the concepts: http://www.diffen.com/difference/Hypothesis_vs_Theory

"Pretty sure no, because DVI and HDMI signalling is very much different. DVI has dedicated red, green, and blue wires, over which it sends a synchronized bitstream of sub-pixels. HDMI uses those three wires as generic data channels, which are used in parallel to send packets containing pixels, or audio data, or whatever you want. DVI and HDMI are physical compatible, but not electronically."

Me thinks you need to read some specifications before posting. Here's a couple primers:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dvi
http://www.diffen.com/difference/DVI_vs_HDMI

HDMI and DVI are electrically identical and partially protocol compatible.

Physically differences:
*Their connectors are physically incompatible and require a converter plug.
*Also, DVI potentially supports a legacy VGA analogue signal on the connector. Few actual DVI cables carry this signal, but it is often available on the video card, which then needs a converter plug to plug into a VGA cable.

Protocol differences:
*HDMI includes support for DRM (HDCP) and audio. These are not supported by DVI devices, though they can be forwarded through a DVI connector to an HDMI device.
*HDMI has had several revisions, which allow for increased clocking and greater bitdepth. I would not expect these revisions to be supported by DVI devices. However, I've never had reason to look into this, so cannot comment further.

The converter (plug) between HDMI and DVI is known as a passive converter, because it has no active electronics inside. All it does is allow two separate types of plugs to connect. Differentiate this with a DVI/HDMI to DisplayPort covnerter, which is active, because HDMI/DVI and DisplayPort have completely different electrical specifications and protocols, even though they are both digital.

But the A/C is huge. My bills run $40-$50 7 months a year, $75 1 month a year, and $130 4 months a year. The difference is entirely A/C.

How much insulation do you have? How much time/money have you invested in retrofitting your house for passive-solar energy savings?

Amory Lovins lives in an energy positive house at 9,000ft elev. in the Rockies, and regularly grows bananas in his living room atrium. (And no, his house was not more expensive than a "normal" house to build.)

$130 4 months a year

Let's round everything out and just call that $100 per month "A/C penalty" for living in the USA, or $400 per year. Last I checked, that $400 would buy you a thousand sq/ft of insulation.

And that is just scratching the surface... There are so many things you can do, such as:

1. Install awnings to shade windows in summer. (and/or plant deciduous trees over windows)
2. Install rooftop solar (whether PV cells or water heating, doesn't matter, as long as you shade the roof and harvest the insolation)
3. Install a thermal mass storage/buffer system of some kind. (there are numerous options... water, stone, earth shelter, etc.. pick what works best for your region)
4. If you're in a cold-winter region, look into a rocket mass heater as an alternate/backup system. (one guy in New England claims to have heated his home on nothing but junk mail last winter.)

The "trick" is to understand the energy flows in your own home and take control of them for your own benefit.

Sorry, I'm not sure if you're kidding with me, or if you don't know the difference between principle and principal.

Either way, here you go.

From my experience, an LLC is used for partnerships. In some states, only certain professionals can even form LLC's. Often they are for protecting the partners from each other.. (ie, accountant partner screws up.. Lawsuit can hurt the partner, but they can't go after the assets of the other partners, if they were not involved)

There's also an LLP (Limited Liability Partnership) which is slightly different than a LLC.

No kidding. Visa bigger than they are. Sounds nice until you can plainly see that he's pulling this information out of his ass. I'm pretty none of what he says is even remotely true. I really do wonder WHY they cut Wikileaks off. I honestly think they WERE pressured by the US government and just don't want to say anything. Why the hell would they cut off a cash cow like that unless they were forced to?

Quick and dirty search:
Products: (Mastercard) Payment systems (Visa)Payment systems
Revenue: US$5.10 Billion (FY 2009) US$6.91 Billion (FY 2009)
Operating income: US$2.26 Billion (FY 2009) US$3.54 Billion (FY 2009)
Net income: US$1.46 Billion (FY 2009) US$2.35 Billion (FY 2009)
Total assets: US$7.47 Billion (FY 2009) US$32.3 Billion (FY 2009)
Total equity: US$3.50 Billion (FY 2009) US$23.2 Billion (FY 2009)
Employees: 5,000 (2008) 5,700 (Q1 2010)
(http://www.diffen.com/difference/Mastercard_vs_Visa)

Oh, and the one that hit the other guy in the face with the foam ball should have been arrested for battery.

fixed that for you, since there is a difference between the two
See: http://www.diffen.com/difference/Assault_vs_Battery

One hiccup: their ads system uses Google ads. Maybe they've implemented this in an anonymous way. I hope they have, but either way, at least with ixquick there a hope of privacy, unlike Google.

It looks like they did. The ads are not loaded with Javascript or anything from Google. They are basically links served from ixquick's server as:
http://www.google.com/aclk?sa=l&ai=[Publisher/Advertiser Identifier]&adurl=[URL of the ad].

Since ixquick uses POST instead of GET, Google can't see your keywords in the referrer header, all they'll see is that you came from (http://us2.ixquick.com/do/metasearch.pl).

My only issue with these meta-search engines is that they rely on all of the other search engines to produce their results. I'm not sure if what they're doing is allowed by the engines' terms of services (e.g. I don't see Google on ixquick's list, but yet there's Scroogle), and I don't know if they're viable long term.

I'm pretty sure if they get big enough then Bing, Yahoo and others will have an issue with their traffic going ixquick's way.

Everyone can edit
Doesn't mean your edits won't be reverted. It's still faithful to its original mission.
Wikipedia matured a couple of years ago. There are many articles for which the best write-up is a an old version archived on Wikipedia, not the current revision.
It would be nice if someone could redirect their zeal on other wikis instead of Wikipedia. Like this encyclopedia of comparisons.

Linky.

Firefox vs. Chrome comparison The article is a wiki so it will improve over time, but it's in decent shape right now. ~Posted with Firefox

Head to head Blu-ray vs. HD DVD comparison

Some factors affect the uptake of Vista:
1. It needs a lot more RAM. Or atleast people seem to think so.
2. People are waiting for it to "settle down" - probably until Service Pack 1 is released.
3. There is a lot of confusion about different Vista versions.

There is also the issue of some drivers not being available. But things will settle down soon enough. One year is not that long of a timeframe to wean marketshare away from one operating system monopoly to another.