Slashdot Mirror

You mean the one that requires people with penises and testosterone who are sexually attracted to women to use the women's bathroom or locker room?

Seriously - exact same situation - link below of legal parking spot.

I submitted evidence for an online hearing that included the blog post from TFA (plus a screen grab of that street view, plus the appropriate legal stuffs).

I'd love to know when Mr. Quant NYC submitted his findings. I got my ticket three weeks ago (and this Slashdot post was a reminder for me to fight it).

https://www.google.com/maps/pl...

Citation needed, if you would. Injecting 10mL of any oil into your bloodstream is probably not a good idea, but the LD50 studies I've read put the level somewhere north of 130 mg/kg of pure THC (citing Rosencrantz 1983). Hash oil is potent, but it's unlikely to be better than 60% THC at best, and the higher the potency, the less suitable it would be for injection, since THC is basically a resin. As far as I have been able to determine, hash oil has a density about the same as water, so all told the average person would probably have to shoot up ~14 mL of very pure oil, and even then most of the effects would be due to physical effects of the oil rather than the neurological effects of the drug.

I can definitely see someone dying from injecting oil into their veins. However, as long as you're willing to argue fine technical points, is it still a death from cannabis if the cannabis was immaterial to the cause of death?

The true original story is from the Journal de Montréal (translation), which is somewhat credible, but like to go for the sensationalism over the facts. Not a tabloid, but a popular / populist paper.

also confuse inquiries, which politicians in both parties do all the time, with legislation.

Nobody has written and passed a law to regulate what news Facebook shows or how it ranks its news. If any Republican tried that, he would face the wrath of Conservatives who are staunchly philosophically opposed to such government mandates of the press. Sadly, you r confusion has some merit given the number of RINOs in congress who campaign as "conservative" but then go to Washington and behave like big government Democrats who have no qualms about meddling with the press (hence the rise of the TEA Party which was a reaction to the Bush43 admin bailouts of banks and auto companies and then to Obama doubling-down on that cronyism).

For actual press and media manipulation, look to Obama who went after Fox News reporter James Rosen as a Terrorist in order to get at his phone records and e-mails to try to squash some leaks. Or you could look at Hillary for blaming her incompetence in Libya on a YouTube video maker and promising to jail him and then the dude amazingly being jailed for a year at a time when prisons in California were overcrowded and actual criminals were being let out. You could also look at the current scandal where Obama's man has explained how easy it is to fool stupid left wing journalists at places like the NYT into lying for Obama.

also confuse inquiries, which politicians in both parties do all the time, with legislation.

Nobody has written and passed a law to regulate what news Facebook shows or how it ranks its news. If any Republican tried that, he would face the wrath of Conservatives who are staunchly philosophically opposed to such government mandates of the press. Sadly, you r confusion has some merit given the number of RINOs in congress who campaign as "conservative" but then go to Washington and behave like big government Democrats who have no qualms about meddling with the press (hence the rise of the TEA Party which was a reaction to the Bush43 admin bailouts of banks and auto companies and then to Obama doubling-down on that cronyism).

For actual press and media manipulation, look to Obama who went after Fox News reporter James Rosen as a Terrorist in order to get at his phone records and e-mails to try to squash some leaks. Or you could look at Hillary for blaming her incompetence in Libya on a YouTube video maker and promising to jail him and then the dude amazingly being jailed for a year at a time when prisons in California were overcrowded and actual criminals were being let out. You could also look at the current scandal where Obama's man has explained how easy it is to fool stupid left wing journalists at places like the NYT into lying for Obama.

> But it's confusing if you're not - and it's even worse if you don't understand the underlying data model

The basics of git aren't that difficult as this post points out. Even this git tutorial walks one though the basics.

Searching images for git model shows everyone loves to over-complicate git. Here is one example or the popular A successful git branching model. How many freaking arrows do you need?? K.I.S.S. and add *layers* to explain the more complicated git stuff.

Do you need to understand git's underlying data model to use git effectively? No. Does it help? Probably.

The fundamentals of git aren't really that difficult:

* Every git repo is a glorified (local) database.
* Every entry has a unique hash.
* Branches are no different then a commit
* There is a chain of hashes. Head points to the start of this chain.
* Your repo is linear or non-linear as you make it. <--- This is what gets people into trouble.

> Git's not perfect, ...

I don't think anyone is claiming THAT. Anything more advanced then the trivial add, commit, push, pull is going to require a little bit of extra work. GitHub makes managing pull request pretty trivial.

Since Git supports non-linear actions by default, it takes discipline to maintain the expected linear development. Having a way to visualize the commit / branch tree makes dealing with this complexity significantly easier.

Git is a powerful tool with lots of options. IMO if there were less crappy tutorials people wouldn't find it to be so complicated.

Total Commander.
https://play.google.com/store/...

It is awesome on Windows and it is equally awesome on Android.

Cabinet open source, only a file manager, actively developed.

I just uninstalled ES File Manager - a shame because I loved that app. (Now, the "battery booster" popup on my son's tablet makes sense.)

I installed Amaze File Manager. It's free and open source. So far, it's very quick and seems full featured (at least for the uses I need it for).

On Android, I use Ghost Commander. It's quite like one of my favourites when running Linux: Midnight Commander. It's open source and free, too.

I use Solid Explorer and it does its job very well. It's not free, mind you, but worth the 99 cents or however much I paid for it.

Supports optional root exploration as well.

https://play.google.com/store/...

I've installed Solid to see how that looks. A decent ad-free file explorer is worth a couple of bucks to me.

Maybe you should have tried the ad-free version of ES File Explorer?
https://play.google.com/store/...

4.8 stars. They are doing something right.

Not to happy with my current filemanager, anyone who has any recomendations for alternatives?

ES File Explorer Pro
https://play.google.com/store/...

I've been using Root Explorer for 3 years, and I have no complaints. I believe it works on non-rooted phones (sans the root-only functions), but if not the same developer has just plain Explorer which appears to be the same w/o the root tools.

Root Explorer: https://play.google.com/store/...
Explorer: https://play.google.com/store/...

Note: Most of my apps are the paid version so there may be ads if you go the free route.

I've been using Root Explorer for 3 years, and I have no complaints. I believe it works on non-rooted phones (sans the root-only functions), but if not the same developer has just plain Explorer which appears to be the same w/o the root tools.

Root Explorer: https://play.google.com/store/...
Explorer: https://play.google.com/store/...

Note: Most of my apps are the paid version so there may be ads if you go the free route.

https://www.google.com/search?...

Like there isn't any malware for the iPhone. What kind of shill calls out a competitor for something that plagues their product just as much?

1. In NO way is the iOS Malware list "Just as much" as the Android list.

2. If you look at the list you linked-to, nearly every single entry except possibly 3 of them, requires either a Jailbroken iPhone, an "Enterprise Certificate" download, or the explicit and knowing consent to install (like the various "parental keyloggers"). None of those count, period.

Now, do you want to compare that list with a similar one for Android? Didn't think so...

https://www.google.com/search?...

Like there isn't any malware for the iPhone. What kind of shill calls out a competitor for something that plagues their product just as much?

Agreed. Inertial dampers and gravity generators make stories easier, so even a little bit of physics shows the writers are trying harder. The fictional Starfury of Babylon 5 probably addresses the force and acceleration issues. I think the ideas of modern aerial combat (e.g., drones, missiles) have passed by the N-Dimensional Fighter of the early 1990's, but it's a neat idea.

https://chrome.google.com/webs...

Citation needed

Trends Help: The homepage explained

you’ll also see featured stories at the top of the page that are curated by the News Lab at Google

What news organizations are proudly called out on the top page at Google News Lab? The News York Times. The Guardian. The Verge [Vox].

The usual suspects.

What the fuck is Google?

> Do video card upgrades even matter anymore?

Yes.

* VR requires 90 Hz minimum (Thank god!)
* 4K Gaming at 120 Hz requires beefy hardware.
* ENB mods

If you can't even tell the difference between 24 Hz and 60 Hz ....

OWE my eyes @ 24 fps !

Silky smooth @ 60 fps !

... let alone 120 Hz then obviously you don't need a high end GPU. Continue along with your crappy 30 Hz on consoles. The rest of us will be upgrading.

I would like to know what sort of level of verbal threat counts as worthy of investigation to the Absolute Freedom Of Speech people.

TechDirt cited 2 cases to justify their belief that Digger's statement was rhetorical hyperbole and not a true threat.

https://www.techdirt.com/artic...

https://scholar.google.com/sch...
Rankin v. McPherson, 483 US 378 - Supreme Court 1987

After hearing of the attempted assassination of Ronald Reagan, a black employee of the Constable of Harris County, was fired for saying,

"yeah, he's cutting back medicaid and food stamps. And I said, yeah, welfare and CETA. I said, shoot, if they go for him again, I hope they get him."

The Supreme Court decided that the Constable's office could not fire her for making that statement.

https://scholar.google.com/sch...
Watts v. United States, 394 US 705 - Supreme Court 1969

petitioner was convicted of violating a 1917 statute which prohibits any person from "knowingly and willfully . . . [making] any threat to take the life of or to inflict bodily harm upon the President of the United States . . . ."[*] The incident 706*706 which led to petitioner's arrest occurred on August 27, 1966, during a public rally on the Washington Monument grounds.

According to an investigator for the Army Counter Intelligence Corps who was present, petitioner responded: "They always holler at us to get an education. And now I have already received my draft classification as 1-A and I have got to report for my physical this Monday coming. I am not going. If they ever make me carry a rifle the first man I want to get in my sights is L. B. J." "They are not going to make me kill my black brothers."

I would like to know what sort of level of verbal threat counts as worthy of investigation to the Absolute Freedom Of Speech people.

TechDirt cited 2 cases to justify their belief that Digger's statement was rhetorical hyperbole and not a true threat.

https://www.techdirt.com/artic...

https://scholar.google.com/sch...
Rankin v. McPherson, 483 US 378 - Supreme Court 1987

After hearing of the attempted assassination of Ronald Reagan, a black employee of the Constable of Harris County, was fired for saying,

"yeah, he's cutting back medicaid and food stamps. And I said, yeah, welfare and CETA. I said, shoot, if they go for him again, I hope they get him."

The Supreme Court decided that the Constable's office could not fire her for making that statement.

https://scholar.google.com/sch...
Watts v. United States, 394 US 705 - Supreme Court 1969

petitioner was convicted of violating a 1917 statute which prohibits any person from "knowingly and willfully . . . [making] any threat to take the life of or to inflict bodily harm upon the President of the United States . . . ."[*] The incident 706*706 which led to petitioner's arrest occurred on August 27, 1966, during a public rally on the Washington Monument grounds.

According to an investigator for the Army Counter Intelligence Corps who was present, petitioner responded: "They always holler at us to get an education. And now I have already received my draft classification as 1-A and I have got to report for my physical this Monday coming. I am not going. If they ever make me carry a rifle the first man I want to get in my sights is L. B. J." "They are not going to make me kill my black brothers."

Here are the answers to your concerns:

Underwriter's Laboratory.

Liability Insurance and tort law creates incentives for the insurer to make sure the store doesn't poison its customers and does it much more efficiently and effectively.

Stop responding to that asshole. He keeps making trivial comments with the subject "Simple question" and that lame "I know I'll get modded to -1 for this" attempt at reverse psychology. You have been trolled.

https://www.google.com/search?...

WTH is a LOCA attack?

The facts speak louder than any of these envirowackos, even including the deaths from the nuclear bombs, nuclear is still safer than ANY other power source we have.

http://nextbigfuture.com/2008/...

But let us all hide under the table in fear of the big bogeyman that is nuclear, we can't have cheap power because someone might cry in fear over the nuclear plants.

The "subsidies" that the looney left yell about all the time are standard tax breaks available to manufacturers in the US.

Speaking as both an accountant and someone who runs a manufacturing company, that is not even close to correct. There are a lot of tax breaks the fossil fuel industry gets that are quite specific to their particular industry and not applicable to other commodity manufacturers.

Fossil fuel subsidies were over $500 Billion globally in 2011 and that doesn't account for the cost of mitigating the full cost of the pollution they cause.

actually works

If you like long lines and rationing. All you have to do to believe what you said is ignore the problems in the system

https://www.google.com/search?...

When no one has the ingredients on the label or puts false ingredients on the label that is just fine.

If you care about the ingredients, it's a simple matter to only purchase from stores who label the ingredients on their products. If you're really worried about stores attempting to kill their customers by lying about the ingredients and hoping no one notices (not exactly something anyone with any business sense would do), its a simple matter to only shop at stores who have a 3rd party you trust validate and sign-off on the fact that their list is accurate. In what world is the FDA best equipped to know what's being sold? Are they going to visit stores and test the products before you actually purchase them? No, they'll just create a big show in the name of "doing something" and process paperwork submitted to them with fees while making it impractical for anyone except someone with deep pockets and big enough to own a centralized facility to be able to do business in the industry.

Regulations are there to protect people from companies putting people's health at risk just to lower costs and raise profits.

In this specific case, its obvious the regulations are there to ensure large companies (likely established tobacco companies) can create/maintain their hold on the industry they were losing to local shops, because they're the only ones who will be able to afford the lawyers and fees to go through the red tape.

So you would basically prefer unregulated capitalism that kills people.

No, we'd prefer unregulated capitalism which allows people to be responsible for their own choices and succeed rather than "crony" capitalism/fascism/socialist nationalism which the left appears to decry, but magically suddenly becomes in favor of when it actually comes down to supporting it or not, as long as the politicians or bureaucrats involved pretend to have a "good reason" for it. See also baptists and bootleggers.

Trillion Trees

and throws a childish tantrum if his lectures don't go as smoothly as he would like.

Oh? While I know about his tour/lecture rider:

https://groups.google.com/a/my...

I hadn't heard about any tantrums. I'm not saying he doesn't have tantrums, but only that I hadn't heard of them. I know a bit about autistic spectrum folks so it would not surprise me if he does have a tantrum now and then.

The problem with posting as a registered user, which you seem oddly proud of, is that you can't just come out and say it for fear of negative moderation.

While I am fairly proud of posting logged in and standing by what I say, I'm not afraid of negative moderation. I've been negative-modded for saying things about Stallman. Including my first comment in this thread, it got modded down at first. And I tend to get modded down when I state my opinions about PC gaming and PC gamers among other things. And I get modded down when I confront those I consider sexist/misogynist when they start going on about an "SJW conspiracy"

I HAVE posted AC in specific circumstances. I do it VERY rarely though.

The newer Google images are even better than the one in that story. Those are some serious Pyramids, they should totally build them as replicas of the Egyptian pyramids.

https://www.google.com/maps/@5...

You can zoom in more than that, but it won't show all three structures.

A bake-off using the duck meme:

DuckDuckGo

Bing

Google

Someone else tried a similar experiment:
https://groups.google.com/foru...

pop culture reference

Damn submission without proper previewing!

It's easy and it works!
Google (Gmail)
Yahoo
Microsoft (Hotmail)

From the abstract... Here, we explore the possibility that choices can seem to occur before they are actually made...The experience of choice is susceptible to “postdictive” influence and that people may systematically overestimate the role that consciousness plays in their chosen behavior.

Free will is too heavy a term for what's at play here. These methods of study simply show that our freedom of choice does not mean that we choose at random. And that's been studied and experimented with, debated by philosophers throughout human history, and has popped up even on Slashdot. As my first source clearly says, "One of the worst ways to generate 'random' numbers is to ask somebody to write down some numbers 'at random'. It won't work...The human mind is built for patterns; it doesn't like boring repititions." Just because we have the freedom to choose, a.k.a. "free will," does not guarantee our choices is random.

This experiment just shows that, when we aren't given enough time for the "consciousness circuitry" within our minds to make its choice, other circuitry in our minds take over and make for some interesting results. Maybe, instead of debating whether or not free will exists, we should instead attempt to analyze what cranial pathways are taking over. I'd be very interested to know what portions of the mind take over when it's forced to make split-second decisions, then measure whether or not these decisions are more accurate, or in what ways, compared to the "I've had time to think about it, and I've concluded..." choices.

According to Steven Fry;

"They invented it so early that it was a disadvantage. It held back the course of Chinese history."

and:

"Glass. With glass came lens grinding, came telescopes and microscopes, and through spectacles, intellectuals and scientists had an extra twenty years of reading and active life, and further, all the way through to the invention of medical science, flasks, beakers, retorts . . . Because it's chemically neutral, glass, doesn't react to anything that's in it. And the Chinese had no glass made in all of China from the fourteenth century right up to the nineteenth century. "

and....

"And therefore no mirrors. So, in fact, just because they were satisfied with the tea cup and didn't bother . . . This incredibly ingenious race who would have otherwise invented so many other things, and did invent so many other things, were . . . the one thing they couldn't do. And electronics used glass for valves and so on. "

QI Transcript

I've been following Scott Adams' blog, and he has some insightful things to say about Trump and how he manages to win.

Scroll back a few entries in the blog and they're pretty interesting.

With that background, I've just this morning figured out how Trump managed to pull it off: he's been using "sad" as a verbal kill-shot.

Check out any image of Ted Cruz, and the most notable feature is his sloping eyebrows. He's definitely got that "sad puppy-dog" look.

Trump has been using "sad" in his speeches for months, and associating it with all sorts of slightly pejorative things. He's never made it specific that he's doing this as an association to Cruz, and "sad" is not extreme rhetoric so it escapes peoples' notice. (He sometimes calls Ted sad, but I'm talking about all the other "sad"s over the past few months.)

Furthermore, he masks it by giving people a more transparent and direct kill-shot: "lying Ted Cruz". People are distracted by the extreme moniker and reject it, and all the while they don't notice that they are slowly building an association between "sad" and a wide range of slightly bad things.

So when they see Ted on stage or in the media, that association is what they feel.

I think it's a case of priming, and Trump has masterfully arm-wrestled Ted's reputation to the floor without him realizing it.

Pundits are quick to point out that Trump's unfavorability is at 70%, and all polls show that Hillary would beat Trump in an election.

What they *don't* say is that Hillary herself is only 12 points lower (56% unfavorability), and that's bound to change over the next 6 months.

In fact, Hillary's unfavorability seems to be creeping up of late, and Trump's is falling.

It's starting to look like he might win.

And that he's winning on purpose.

Who'd of think it?

uh... just because your knowledge seems to be limited to the Technology area, doesn't mean other things don't exist.

maybe you have heard of "google" in your Technology area circle of friends... here, let me show you how it works: search for "need more men in nursing"

If it's an iPhone that allows

- Icons in arbitrary locations on your home screen
- Home screen replacement
- Multiple user context (my employer doesn't completely control my device)
- Removing stock apps from my home screen (I don't have an Apple Watch)
- Miracast support
- Customizable lock screen (widgets)
- Customizable control center
- Silencing my phone when I have a "busy" entry on my calendar
- Wifi Analyzer
- Tasker

Then it would be at the most basic level of where it should be, in my opinion.

If it's an iPhone that allows

- Icons in arbitrary locations on your home screen
- Home screen replacement
- Multiple user context (my employer doesn't completely control my device)
- Removing stock apps from my home screen (I don't have an Apple Watch)
- Miracast support
- Customizable lock screen (widgets)
- Customizable control center
- Silencing my phone when I have a "busy" entry on my calendar
- Wifi Analyzer
- Tasker

Then it would be at the most basic level of where it should be, in my opinion.

Source: Too many to count.

> A single judge is for all intents & purposes above the law.

You keep using this word judge. It doesn't mean what you think it means.

A judge doesn't make the law; the judge enforces the law, based on their interpretation of the spirit vs the letter.

> There is no (effective) law that constrains the orders of a single judge.

Uh, Hello McFly. The constitution. Federal Law and State Law.

A judge just can't make up an illegal orders -- the courts MUST follow due process

Americans born after 1970 or so have little memory of what smog was like before the introduction of emissions controls dramatically improved air quality. I remember as a kid coming back from vacation and getting the first glimpse of the city a giant brown smudge on the horizon. When you got back you could actually feel how much harder it was to breathe; it was like a mild asthma attack.

If you have no memory of pre-emissions control smog, try this image search. Yes, it really looked like that. Not every day mind you, but regularly in the summers.

The only place in the US where you can still experience that kind of epic smog is in parts of LA, and even that has improved over the last several decades.

A lot of trackers have had rules such as "If it's not on NFOrce or grokMusiQ then forget it!" and "not older than seven (7) days", which makes it hard to find suitable "material not already on the tracker." (Search result) Is a member supposed to compose, record, mix, and master his own material? Or even allowed to do so?

What.CD doesn't have idiotic scene-based rules like that. If it's an actual release from an artist (or a semi-official bootleg, or soundboard recording of a live show), and it meets the format/quality requirements (e.g. minimum bitrate of 192kbps), it can be uploaded. And yes, we also have a subsection called "Vanity House", which serves as a platform for members to promote their own music, be it something they made in their bedroom or an album their band just professionally recorded.

Does What.CD have such a rule?

Nope, we have no hit-and-run or ratio-per-torrent requirements. If you want to snatch a torrent and never seed it for even a single second, go for it.

Highest enforced ratio is 0.6

Still hard to get to that on a torrent with dozens of seeds and no other downloaders.

The biggest way to improve your ratio on any site is to upload material not already on the tracker.

A lot of trackers have had rules such as "If it's not on NFOrce or grokMusiQ then forget it!" and "not older than seven (7) days", which makes it hard to find suitable "material not already on the tracker." (Search result) Is a member supposed to compose, record, mix, and master his own material? Or even allowed to do so?

many sites also have specific restrictions for time period which actually ease the ratio rules a bit. "Sorry you were a leaf on this torrent but we're going to make you stay seeding for at least 2 weeks to keep the torrent alive. you don't get the ratio but you at least tried" Stuff.

Does What.CD have such a rule?