Re:Were nerds here... use the f'ing metric system
on
The 100 Degree Data Center
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
The zero of Fahrenheit -- the freezing point of saturated brine -- is no less sensible than the Celcius zero of the freezing point of water. Fahrenheit is also more precise with fewer digits in the ranges most people deal with day to day.
Yeah, because I'm always having to deal with saturated brine. I can't tell you how many times I've gone out driving in sub-zero temperatures and nearly skidded on all that saturated brine ice.
Fahrenheit is also more precise with fewer digits in the ranges most people deal with day to day
What? Nobody needs to be more accurate than 1C for day-to-day casual usage. For anything else there's this neat thing called a fraction that people can use.
Fahrenheit just makes more sense to most of us. 30s = cold, 40s = chilly, 50s = cool, 60s = decent/might need a windbreaker, 70s = nice, 80s = warm, 90s = hot, etc, etc. Celsius is no where near that intuitive and was as arbitrarily defined as Fahrenheit was.
Arbitrarily defined? 0C = Freezing point of water at 1 atmosphere (within 0.01C); 100C = Boiling point of water at 1 atmosphere (within 0.02C). Celsius makes more sense to everyone else who uses it - why would "30s [F] = cold" be more sensible than "0-10C = cold"?
0C = Freezing 10C = Chilly/cold 20C = Warm (around room temperature) 30C = Hot 40C = Very hot 100C = You're being cooked by cannibals
This is no less sensible than fahrenheit, the only difference being celsius has a logical and practical 0-point which makes freezing conditions instantly obvious.
No Child Left Behind was signed into law in 2002. TFA's figures are from questions given to adults. There can be no more than 7 years worth of adults who could have gained any benefit whatsoever from that Act. Not exactly damning evidence.
The UK government can afford to spend billions maintaining and staffing a nuclear submarine fleet but they can't afford to buy a fucking roof for the dock?
Do they ask the Chinese and Russian spy satellite operators to blur the images before they pass them on to their superiors too?
Eventually, popular non-video websites might follow suit. Imagine a future water cooler conversation over broadband choice: 'I went with Comcast 'cause they get Yahoo.'"
More like "I went with *DifferentISP* because they're $10 cheaper and I can get that other content/service from bittorrent/another website".
From install time to GUI efficiency, Ubuntu beats Windows and is often twice as fast.
Does this mean that opening a taskbar menu in GNOME for the first time post-boot no longer locks the UI for several seconds while it populates the menu, as it does in Ubuntu 8.10 (GNOME 2.22 IIRC)? The fact that the UI element most people will use first every time they boot their computer takes an age to load (in UI response terms) in Ubuntu seems like the very antithesis of an efficient UI to me.
I confess I didn't RTFA so if this is mentioned and the summary simply skipped that inconvenient truth I apologise now.
Thank you for that demonstration of classic male phallophobia. The people most traumatized by this incident were not innocent little girls, prudish old ladies, or even young adult women who suffer from their routine objectification in porn. No, the people most traumatized were quivering heterosexual men who are afraid to see... a penis.
I'm not afraid, I just don't want to. Thank you for that demonstration of a classic attempt by an amateur psychologist to turn every thought into a $2 diagnosis of the human condition.
Comcast needn't have apologised for broadcasting porn. What did warrant an apology was showing porn containing nothing more than an ugly guy flapping his cock all over the place. You, sirs, have crossed the line!
It's a good job that cameras are only available on phones then. I mean, hypothetically speaking of course, if there were some way to obtain a camera that wasn't attached to a phone then this law would be ludicrous. Thankfully that's not the case. You and your children can sleep safe tonight.
The support of nationalist thinking is implicit in the idea that the software infrastructures in vast geographical areas can be boiled down to single actions and the suggestion that each will inevitably act on making its own OS instead of using existing software and development models that have worked successfully across borders for decades (yes, even in the dreaded 'free market'). In other words, the problem with your post and the reason you clearly mark yourself as an imbecile is your failure to understand that any forward thinking nation isn't already working in exactly the opposite direction - towards using the work of pre-existing software and OSes as a basis for cheap and effective software. The very concept of developing an OS as a national export is backwards and only gets off the ground in these bullshit authori-capitalist states where the concept of free software and global markets flies directly in the face of the powers that be.
The EU will not being developing its own OS that "will be awesome, if austere" because they're not total idiots. Nor will America be passed by because of their support of free markets. If anything, it will be America's deviance from free markets into protectionism and patent-hoarding that will drag them down.
I think you mean both radio and light are part of the electromagnetic spectrum. "Light" is almost always used to refer exclusively to the visible (and near-visible [IR, UV]) portion of the EM spectrum.
I forget where I read it, but someone once pointed out that if you need a new computer at work you should go in asking for $10,000,000 - then when you get laughed out of the office and come back asking for a ridiculous gaming rig that costs $5000 you might just get it.
It's the same theory, in my view. Realistically he's never going to get what he wants, but just the act of having him there campaigning for it makes 'middle of the road' suggestions more reasonable by comparison.
Except that's not what really happens is it? The guy who asks for the $10,000,000 computer might get the $5000 system in the end or he might get shown the door or otherwise told to shut up and get back to work. Even if he gets it, everyone who had to deal with that guy has silently written him off as a total asshole to be avoided and skipped over for promotions in future.
And so it is with Stallman. If (one of) the most vocal advocates of free software is a ranting loony who has no concept of the real world then a lot of people will write off free software and its supporters as ridiculous zealots who live in a fantasy world. People and software to be avoided.
I'm afraid the reasoning doesn't work in the anecdote or the real world scenario. Act like a dick and people will think you're a dick. Talk sense (for long enough) and people will listen. It's that simple.
A new version of Nvidia Corp.'s Reality Synthesizer serves as the graphic processing unit for the game console. The revised version of the part is priced at $58.01, down 30.3 percent from $83.17 previously.
The summary has used the CPU prices as both. Seriously, even if you the submitter made an honest mistake writing it down, surely the editor should've noticed that both figures being the same was suspicious and double-checked? Is it really too much to ask for the slightest bit of editing?
Wouldn't most governments generally prefer that their citizens be trackable? I can't imagine the Egyptian government is somehow a beacon of light in the world of internal spying, so what gives?
A search IS harrassment. It's a gross violation of your person. It's a massive exercise of power, sending the message that you don't even control your own body, that we can do anything to you at any time. That's why there's an entire amendment in the Bill of Rights prohibiting it until we're pretty sure we're gonna find a dead body somewhere.
I don't mean to offend, but the level of subservience in your post is frightening. We're Americans. We're supposed to be easy to govern, but impossible to rule.
No, it says they can do certain things to you before you get on a plane. That's a billion miles away from anything, anywhere, anytime. By your logic nobody should be searchable before getting on a plane. Now, whatever you may think about this particular program, prohibiting any kind of search whatsoever before getting on a plane would be beyond madness. It would make planes the holy grail of bombability - walk on with a couple of lbs of explosives and be guaranteed a 200+ kill on the plane and maybe 100s more on the ground if you time it right. Are you seriously suggesting that is acceptable because you believe you mustn't be searched even when getting on someone else's private property as a privilege?
Lastly, and I can't believe I'm having to clarify this yet again in this entire thread: I don't support this program in particular, I'm merely defending it against ignorant Outrage Theatre by people who have no idea if that 1% figure is good or bad and just want to bitch and moan without even knowing the facts of the situation. It's entirely possible that it doesn't hold up to scrutiny when all the facts are in, but just the same I'm not going to condemn something until I have those facts. Doing so just means you're being subservient to someone else's propaganda.
Do you realize that is LESS than a 1% arrest rate? Less than 1% of people that are flagged as suspicious have any cause to be arrested and you are going to sit here DEFENDING the damn program?!
You sir, are an idiot. Stop talking. Good day.
You'll have to excuse me if I'm not too impressed at being called an idiot by someone who can't understand my posts. I asked for a comparison between the arrest rate of the behavioural-based searching and the random searching that goes on all over the place. That's not defending anything, that's simply expecting some context and objectivity from my news sources. I'm so sorry if that doesn't meet your propaganda swallowing approval.
I addressed that under "subsequent mealy-mouthed attempts at evasion", thanks.
It's not "subsequent" if it's the sentence imediately BEFORE and AFTER the sentences you keep quoting, dumbass. Since you're too frightened to quote my qhole post here it is. I've bolded the parts that shows you're a fucking idiot:
If there haven't been any tiger attacks in the whole time the net has been up then there's no basis to say that it has been a success or a failure. You might even claim that the absence of attacks is a result of the nets being put up and therefore they have been a success.
Now, I ask you: How many terrorist attacks have there been on planes since this system was put in place?
Note that I'm not saying it actually has been a success, I'm saying I see no example of it having failed and I don't see how some random arrest figure with no context whatsoever proves anything one way or they other.
Slashdot Mirror
The zero of Fahrenheit -- the freezing point of saturated brine -- is no less sensible than the Celcius zero of the freezing point of water. Fahrenheit is also more precise with fewer digits in the ranges most people deal with day to day.
Yeah, because I'm always having to deal with saturated brine. I can't tell you how many times I've gone out driving in sub-zero temperatures and nearly skidded on all that saturated brine ice.
Fahrenheit is also more precise with fewer digits in the ranges most people deal with day to day
What? Nobody needs to be more accurate than 1C for day-to-day casual usage. For anything else there's this neat thing called a fraction that people can use.
Fahrenheit just makes more sense to most of us. 30s = cold, 40s = chilly, 50s = cool, 60s = decent/might need a windbreaker, 70s = nice, 80s = warm, 90s = hot, etc, etc. Celsius is no where near that intuitive and was as arbitrarily defined as Fahrenheit was.
Arbitrarily defined? 0C = Freezing point of water at 1 atmosphere (within 0.01C); 100C = Boiling point of water at 1 atmosphere (within 0.02C). Celsius makes more sense to everyone else who uses it - why would "30s [F] = cold" be more sensible than "0-10C = cold"?
0C = Freezing
10C = Chilly/cold
20C = Warm (around room temperature)
30C = Hot
40C = Very hot
100C = You're being cooked by cannibals
This is no less sensible than fahrenheit, the only difference being celsius has a logical and practical 0-point which makes freezing conditions instantly obvious.
No Child Left Behind was signed into law in 2002. TFA's figures are from questions given to adults. There can be no more than 7 years worth of adults who could have gained any benefit whatsoever from that Act. Not exactly damning evidence.
The UK government can afford to spend billions maintaining and staffing a nuclear submarine fleet but they can't afford to buy a fucking roof for the dock?
Do they ask the Chinese and Russian spy satellite operators to blur the images before they pass them on to their superiors too?
our current civilization has become an increasingly brutal civilization
You're not very familiar with the history of the human race are you?
Eventually, popular non-video websites might follow suit. Imagine a future water cooler conversation over broadband choice: 'I went with Comcast 'cause they get Yahoo.'"
More like "I went with *DifferentISP* because they're $10 cheaper and I can get that other content/service from bittorrent/another website".
From install time to GUI efficiency, Ubuntu beats Windows and is often twice as fast.
Does this mean that opening a taskbar menu in GNOME for the first time post-boot no longer locks the UI for several seconds while it populates the menu, as it does in Ubuntu 8.10 (GNOME 2.22 IIRC)? The fact that the UI element most people will use first every time they boot their computer takes an age to load (in UI response terms) in Ubuntu seems like the very antithesis of an efficient UI to me.
I confess I didn't RTFA so if this is mentioned and the summary simply skipped that inconvenient truth I apologise now.
Thank $diety they wear blue or they wouldn't be at ease at all!
Thank $diety they could fit into their uniforms!
It's not a "Batleth", it's a "Bat'leth". Without the apostrophe it just looks ridiculous.
Thank you for that demonstration of classic male phallophobia. The people most traumatized by this incident were not innocent little girls, prudish old ladies, or even young adult women who suffer from their routine objectification in porn. No, the people most traumatized were quivering heterosexual men who are afraid to see... a penis.
I'm not afraid, I just don't want to. Thank you for that demonstration of a classic attempt by an amateur psychologist to turn every thought into a $2 diagnosis of the human condition.
Comcast needn't have apologised for broadcasting porn. What did warrant an apology was showing porn containing nothing more than an ugly guy flapping his cock all over the place. You, sirs, have crossed the line!
It's also a great day for sweeping statements.
It's a good job that cameras are only available on phones then. I mean, hypothetically speaking of course, if there were some way to obtain a camera that wasn't attached to a phone then this law would be ludicrous. Thankfully that's not the case. You and your children can sleep safe tonight.
The support of nationalist thinking is implicit in the idea that the software infrastructures in vast geographical areas can be boiled down to single actions and the suggestion that each will inevitably act on making its own OS instead of using existing software and development models that have worked successfully across borders for decades (yes, even in the dreaded 'free market'). In other words, the problem with your post and the reason you clearly mark yourself as an imbecile is your failure to understand that any forward thinking nation isn't already working in exactly the opposite direction - towards using the work of pre-existing software and OSes as a basis for cheap and effective software. The very concept of developing an OS as a national export is backwards and only gets off the ground in these bullshit authori-capitalist states where the concept of free software and global markets flies directly in the face of the powers that be.
The EU will not being developing its own OS that "will be awesome, if austere" because they're not total idiots. Nor will America be passed by because of their support of free markets. If anything, it will be America's deviance from free markets into protectionism and patent-hoarding that will drag them down.
Right. So you think nationalism is what's been missing from the software industry? What is this, Fucktards Get In For Free Day at slashdot?
And pray-tell, what real benefits are those?
Vista's Freecell is fully horizontally resizable. I've been waiting 15 years for that feature, if that isn't worth the upgrade I don't know what is.
I think you mean both radio and light are part of the electromagnetic spectrum. "Light" is almost always used to refer exclusively to the visible (and near-visible [IR, UV]) portion of the EM spectrum.
The name Python originally came from Monty Python, so you're about 18 years late on that joke.
I forget where I read it, but someone once pointed out that if you need a new computer at work you should go in asking for $10,000,000 - then when you get laughed out of the office and come back asking for a ridiculous gaming rig that costs $5000 you might just get it.
It's the same theory, in my view. Realistically he's never going to get what he wants, but just the act of having him there campaigning for it makes 'middle of the road' suggestions more reasonable by comparison.
Except that's not what really happens is it? The guy who asks for the $10,000,000 computer might get the $5000 system in the end or he might get shown the door or otherwise told to shut up and get back to work. Even if he gets it, everyone who had to deal with that guy has silently written him off as a total asshole to be avoided and skipped over for promotions in future.
And so it is with Stallman. If (one of) the most vocal advocates of free software is a ranting loony who has no concept of the real world then a lot of people will write off free software and its supporters as ridiculous zealots who live in a fantasy world. People and software to be avoided.
I'm afraid the reasoning doesn't work in the anecdote or the real world scenario. Act like a dick and people will think you're a dick. Talk sense (for long enough) and people will listen. It's that simple.
A new version of Nvidia Corp.'s Reality Synthesizer serves as the graphic processing unit for the game console. The revised version of the part is priced at $58.01, down 30.3 percent from $83.17 previously.
The summary has used the CPU prices as both. Seriously, even if you the submitter made an honest mistake writing it down, surely the editor should've noticed that both figures being the same was suspicious and double-checked? Is it really too much to ask for the slightest bit of editing?
Wouldn't most governments generally prefer that their citizens be trackable? I can't imagine the Egyptian government is somehow a beacon of light in the world of internal spying, so what gives?
A search IS harrassment. It's a gross violation of your person. It's a massive exercise of power, sending the message that you don't even control your own body, that we can do anything to you at any time. That's why there's an entire amendment in the Bill of Rights prohibiting it until we're pretty sure we're gonna find a dead body somewhere.
I don't mean to offend, but the level of subservience in your post is frightening. We're Americans. We're supposed to be easy to govern, but impossible to rule.
No, it says they can do certain things to you before you get on a plane. That's a billion miles away from anything, anywhere, anytime. By your logic nobody should be searchable before getting on a plane. Now, whatever you may think about this particular program, prohibiting any kind of search whatsoever before getting on a plane would be beyond madness. It would make planes the holy grail of bombability - walk on with a couple of lbs of explosives and be guaranteed a 200+ kill on the plane and maybe 100s more on the ground if you time it right. Are you seriously suggesting that is acceptable because you believe you mustn't be searched even when getting on someone else's private property as a privilege?
Lastly, and I can't believe I'm having to clarify this yet again in this entire thread: I don't support this program in particular, I'm merely defending it against ignorant Outrage Theatre by people who have no idea if that 1% figure is good or bad and just want to bitch and moan without even knowing the facts of the situation. It's entirely possible that it doesn't hold up to scrutiny when all the facts are in, but just the same I'm not going to condemn something until I have those facts. Doing so just means you're being subservient to someone else's propaganda.
Just because you're a coward don't presume everyone else is. If I'd really thought what you think I implied I would've just come out and said it.
Wow, trolls are out in force today.
Do you realize that is LESS than a 1% arrest rate? Less than 1% of people that are flagged as suspicious have any cause to be arrested and you are going to sit here DEFENDING the damn program?!
You sir, are an idiot. Stop talking. Good day.
You'll have to excuse me if I'm not too impressed at being called an idiot by someone who can't understand my posts. I asked for a comparison between the arrest rate of the behavioural-based searching and the random searching that goes on all over the place. That's not defending anything, that's simply expecting some context and objectivity from my news sources. I'm so sorry if that doesn't meet your propaganda swallowing approval.
I addressed that under "subsequent mealy-mouthed attempts at evasion", thanks.
It's not "subsequent" if it's the sentence imediately BEFORE and AFTER the sentences you keep quoting, dumbass. Since you're too frightened to quote my qhole post here it is. I've bolded the parts that shows you're a fucking idiot:
If there haven't been any tiger attacks in the whole time the net has been up then there's no basis to say that it has been a success or a failure. You might even claim that the absence of attacks is a result of the nets being put up and therefore they have been a success.
Now, I ask you: How many terrorist attacks have there been on planes since this system was put in place?
Note that I'm not saying it actually has been a success, I'm saying I see no example of it having failed and I don't see how some random arrest figure with no context whatsoever proves anything one way or they other.
Once again: You are an idiot.