Even more to the point. Tomatoes, Peas, carrots, etc, etc, etc.
Anything easily growable.
Why would anyone buy those items at a mark-up when you can have a garden full of it in your backyard?
Merely because it is easier to go to the store to get a quality item than it is to maintain and labor over a harvest of your own. Never underestimate the buying power of the lazy.
My mother was a single mom with a single child and I had to go to a babysitters after school. Instead of going home, I'd be dropped off at my sitters.
I believe it was my first day at the new sitters. The sitter had a young child nearly my age at the time who attended the same school. The sitter asked him to make sure I got on the correct bus. Well, it didn't work that way.
The school put me on the wrong bus.
No one knew there was an issue, until the bus arrived at the sitters and the sitters son was crying saying he never saw me and thus I wasn't stepping off the bus with him.
On my side, I don't think I knew anything was wrong until I was the last kid on the bus and the driver asked me where I was supposed to be going. Again, it was a new sitters and I'm sure I replied that I wasn't sure. I had SOME idea, however. I know this because I was trying to instruct the bus driver as to where to go. Interestingly enough, my family later moved to the same area and became familiar with it. The route I was asking the driver to go wasn't too far off, only a couple streets away. Regardless, it wasn't me who got me "home".
I don't know the details on the other side too well. But my mother had gotten word that I didn't get off the bus and called the school. The school put her in touch with the dispatcher for the busses and they got in contact with my driver (whom I believe was in contact with them, but there wasn't a link between me and my mother yet).
She simply told them where to go and the driver got me there. A little fuss and I'm sure I was scared, but a simple phone call from those who knew where I was supposed to be and I was there shortly after.
GPS, cell phones, computers as we know them, the internet as we know it, etc, etc, etc, didn't exist. Yet I got home safe that day.
Sometimes you CAN trust the system to work. Just be informed as to when and where your child was supposed to be and you can pick up the trail quickly. Even if my mother wasn't going to find out about the incident for a while and I was stranded longer, I have no doubt the school would have looked up records and figure it all out on their own. At least they would have explored contacting the "contacts" list in my file, etc.
If it was a malicious attempt to abduct me, I don't even think a cell/tracker would have helped. Pretty sure someone will confiscate that quickly.
Why would a company spend money to make software more efficient when the current incarnation does its job just fine?
While I like the idea of being as succinct and efficient as possible with your code, at what point does it become fruitless?
Obviously, if you're testing your code on a "new" workstation and it's sluggish, you'll find ways to make it work better. But if it works well? What boss is going to pay you to work on a project for no real benefit other than to point out it is very efficient?
I play a few too many video games than I probably should, when will that be a diagnosable mental illness?
How about my girlfriend who likes TV and Facebook a bit more than the average person? I mean, that's gotta be a new mental illness. Probably easily treatable with a $300 bottle of pills from the big pharma's right?
Every time a bear, moose, mouse, dog, cat, etc, does its thing, that waste gets filtered and flushed down streams and rivers into lakes and other bodies of water. Some of it is filtered down into Aquifers as well.
Hell, your sewage is merely treated and released back into the environment.
Where did people think all of that went? Into some large holding tank labeled as Biohazard and buried?
The problem with these conspiracy theories is this single and simple flaw. You have to bring people in on the conspiracy to create it and set it in motion. In this sue happy world, you can bet your ass that at least one person "in on it" will blow the whistle. Maybe not for personal gain but at least to see someone burn. If these people are "evil" and cooking a world altering conspiracy, they would probably have no qualms cutting 401k's or health benefits of the other workers. This would be easily enough to push someone to spill the beans.
Keeping a conspiracy under wraps is near impossible. The only way you can reasonably assure it won't be leaked is if everyone in on it is 100% vested and has no reason to go astray.
I'm not saying there aren't people out there trying to push large conspiratorial agendas, because I'm sure there are. I'm just saying I don't think they can hire all who it would take to make it really work and not have a leak somewhere that blows the plan.
As long as the media keeps hyping it, people of all walks will continue to go see it.
What's personal opinion when you can just follow the call of the media outlets!
What's funny is, my girlfriend is begging me to go see it this week. No, she's no Trekkie at all. But what is interesting is that over the weekend she took out my Generations DVD and wanted to watch it.
I've been trying to get her to watch it a little bit with me here and there but no dice. One new heavily hyped movie comes out and all of a sudden she wants to start watching it.
Either way I win, I just find it odd that it took major media outlets hyping/loving it before she would touch it.
I have a feeling a lot of people will see this sort of thing happening. But again, not complaining. It would be GREAT if the Star Trek fan base could be reinvigorated!
As long as her parents don't push her to study instead of being a kid, I'm all for advancing her schooling. When the neighbor's kid knocks on the door asking if she can go out and play, don't deny her that and tell her she has 2 more hours of flash cards to study.
Kids, smart or not, are still kids. I'd hate to see her lose out on her childhood.
I totally agree with your conclusion. We're entirely over-sensitive, especially in the U.S.
However, I have issues with the coloring book and I'm mostly glad it was removed.
In my opinion, 9/11 is still a very large and very sore subject for many people. I believe the little fly-by stunt the government pulled this week proves that. However, that's not the direct reason I think the book was "off color" (forgive the pun).
I was speaking with my girlfriend and we're in agreement. Children, especially children that are at the age where coloring books are a learning aid really don't need to be exposed to the details of 9/11. Frankly, most children barely understand that different people live in different parts of the world. The U.S. is a big enough place with enough demographics to keep a kids mind chugging out questions for quite some time.
Children coloring in planes flying and blowing up into buildings won't mean squat to them. The word "Terrorist" is basically just another word for "bad" or "stranger". The meaning of what happened and what it means is entirely lost on a child.
Think of it this way, I can't see explaining to a child (of coloring book age) what really happened on 9/11. What is a coloring book really going to teach them then?
I don't know, rambling a bit here, but I just don't see the point in coloring in 9/11 imagery. If you want children to learn about 9/11, show them news footage and witness accounts. Then teach about the politics and religions that led up to the event and what happened afterwards (in response to and the just because's). But kids of that age, again, really aren't ready (as a whole) to be told, let alone understand, what really happened.
Regardless of what you may think, Wars, Nazis, 9/11, etc, just simply aren't coloring book material. Lets keep kids coloring books to Spongebob and Animals. When they are old enough to understand and respect what happened, then they can be exposed.
All this is of course from a schooling perspective. If you want to teach your kids about the realities of the world at home at whatever age you choose, please feel free!
Aren't Judges supposed to remove themselves from a case if there is a known conflict of interest or an arguable bias? Don't they get in trouble for presiding over cases with this bias?
Maybe someone with a background in law can answer this? Google didn't seem to want to give any definitive answers. Then again, maybe the laws in Sweden are different?
Why are these sensitive systems connected to the public internet. Either directly or indirectly, whose bright idea was it? If you need a computer in the lab connected to the internet, fine, just keep the infrastructure seperate.
I mean, "violent" video games are linked to cancer. They are linked to diseases of bystanders who are in frequent proximity as well.
It's causing quite the health epidemic. It's amazing how it was once popular and even fun! Now, it's known to be a carcinogen and causes other diseases.
Wait.. games.. right? We're talking about video games here? And what the @#$@ is "violent" anyways? Anything that shows any blood? Anything to do with guns? How about anything that depicts fighting or harsh language? How about any game where anything at all is killed?
Goombas, the genocide of Goombas. That's pretty f'ing violent. Better double, wait.. we are already taxed on the sale, plus a sin tax, so triple tax Super Mario Brothers.
Lets just go ahead and ban anything that happens outside of Church and Eating meals with the family. Crap, aren't there some churches that aren't quite, *cough* wholesome as well? Little boy fondlers and all (no matter how rare). Oh and bad stuff happens in the home in some cases as well, so we should strike that too. Let alone any entertainment that has obviously been **PROVEN** to cause violent behavior in, well, anyone.
WTF am I even talking about anymore? I'm making about as much sense as these god damn politicians now.
Caps are fine, at least in the sense that they ALWAYS existed under some vague asterisk following the word "unlimited".
But what's got me worried is the fact that when I started playing around on the internet, the most heavy web surfing was a few gifs and/or jpgs.
Now, we have full flash animations, games, interactive multimedia presentations. Not to mention embedded audio and video.
Downloads use to be smaller as well. Now with more bandwidth available, software gets bundled with more features and more multimedia. Game demos have gone from 10-20 meg up to 500meg to 2+ gig, easy.
Hell, I'm a legit user, I don't download music (anymore, I did when I was younger) and I don't pull pirated movies/software either. I don't run bittorrent except for the occasional WoW update (when I did play). But I've seen a large jump in bandwidth usage with my new Roku box for watching NetFlix on my tv. That's a lot of streaming video. Are they keeping tech like this in mind? Doubt it.
So, say the caps are aimed at the bandwidth of today, ok, fine. What happens "tomorrow" when demos START at 2gig+? What happens when the only video online starts at widescreen HD? Our bandwidth usage, for simple surfing, has been going up. It would be shortsighted to think it won't keep going up. If the companies with hard established caps don't keep growing your cap, you're going to eventually have to pay for the top tier.
Bandwidth usage inflates with time. I'm not holding my breath that the ISP's will generously increase caps over time.
VA better watch itself, all of us Slashdoters may assemble, protest and overthrow their state government!
Slashdot is known for being a terrorist hotbed of activity.
Seriously though, is it getting just so utterly bullshit that they list Slashdot as a potential terrorist hangout? I mean, really? Is the government this god damned stupid? I suppose in the back of my mind I always knew it was, but wow.
I don't want to come off as a nutjob here, but this country is falling down hard. A new revolution in the next 100 years appears to be more than possible at this point. Laws are getting absolutely ridiculous.
I realize VA is far from the federal government, but this "OMG EVERY1 IZ TERRORIZT!" stuff is getting really scary.
Terrorist.. This decades Communist.. Make lists and round 'em up, boys!
I totally dropped caffeine about a year ago. I would drink about 5 cans of soda a day, so I wasn't a heavyweight caffeine drinker, but it was enough to cause a serious headache for the week during my withdrawals.
2-3 advil was able to subdue the pain and I can't recall feeling tired.
Now, I substitute soda with water and when I need something with flavor I hit the Hi-C and Koolaid. (Make it at home with only 1/2 the called for sugar, still tastes great!).
Now, I'm not tired at all. In the AM at work (8am), I have a hot chocolate with breakfast for a little sugar wake up and I'm good until my 11pm bedtime.
I won't say I feel healthier or better in any way, but I know that not putting all that crap into my system every day is probably doing more good than harm (comparatively). So that's the plus I keep sustaining.
I also have no care in the world to go back either. Coke tastes great! But the money I save (albeit little) and knowing I'll probably be better off in the long run just seems better than Coke.
So this move isn't about making the world free of nukes, it's about making sure they don't fall in the hands of worst rivals. In other words it's completely opportunistic and hypocritical, amirite?
I don't see it that way at all. It sounds like that on the surface, but I don't think it's like that at all.
Take a society without guns (zero, none whatsoever) and put 1 gun into the hands of one side of an argument and 1 gun into the hands of the other side. Both sides are smart enough that they know using the gun would mean the other guy would.
So, what's the problem here, now there are lots of guys without guns and they want them. Sounds like you should give everyone who wants them because we're responsible, so they should be too. I mean, it's too powerful and everyone respects that fact.
So lets give them to everyone, hell if everyone has them, and noone uses them, well, nothing changes....
No.. If you just hand out weapons, or just allow everyone to make them at their own will, eventually one guy will end up with one and he will want to use it. Eventually it gets into the hands of a crazy. N. Korea might not be the crazy guy, but he sure as shit isn't the sane guy.
Yes, it sounds hypocritical, but if enough people have weapons, eventually someone will use them. That is what we want to avoid.
Isn't the red button for safety of the employees? As in, I'm under the floor and somehow the sheathing on a power feed to the rack next to me gets stripped? I start to light up and someone notices and hits the "candy red button" to save me?
Pretty sure if the fire department is coming in to throw water lines around, they are going to cut the power to the building and not to just the circuit on the datacenter floor.
I could be mistaken, but I don't think a 12 volt battery backup in these applications are going to pose much of a "life" risk. Obviously you don't want to put your tongue on the terminals, but I don't think they pose the same threat that the power lines under the floor do.
I think it's fair to point out to everyone that even on an untouched planet, major changes can happen. It's the nature of planets.
I'm not saying humans aren't causing changes on earth, because, well, they ARE. But this just goes to show that even if we don't do anything to influence change, it still happens.
Change isn't necessarily a bad thing, it's just something that happens. Sometimes it happens and it's bad for our type of life and that sucks.
Every now and again, I get this feeling that the masses don't understand that planets evolve, even on their own. If humans never came to be, the earth would still be changing on it's own.
Slashdot Mirror
If they want to be able to tell their clients/customers that their data will literally be destroyed when the server is decommissioned, so be it.
http://www.garner-products.com/PD-8400.htm
Anything easily growable.
Why would anyone buy those items at a mark-up when you can have a garden full of it in your backyard?
Merely because it is easier to go to the store to get a quality item than it is to maintain and labor over a harvest of your own. Never underestimate the buying power of the lazy.
I was quite little, maybe in 1st or 2nd grade.
My mother was a single mom with a single child and I had to go to a babysitters after school. Instead of going home, I'd be dropped off at my sitters.
I believe it was my first day at the new sitters. The sitter had a young child nearly my age at the time who attended the same school. The sitter asked him to make sure I got on the correct bus. Well, it didn't work that way.
The school put me on the wrong bus.
No one knew there was an issue, until the bus arrived at the sitters and the sitters son was crying saying he never saw me and thus I wasn't stepping off the bus with him.
On my side, I don't think I knew anything was wrong until I was the last kid on the bus and the driver asked me where I was supposed to be going. Again, it was a new sitters and I'm sure I replied that I wasn't sure. I had SOME idea, however. I know this because I was trying to instruct the bus driver as to where to go. Interestingly enough, my family later moved to the same area and became familiar with it. The route I was asking the driver to go wasn't too far off, only a couple streets away. Regardless, it wasn't me who got me "home".
I don't know the details on the other side too well. But my mother had gotten word that I didn't get off the bus and called the school. The school put her in touch with the dispatcher for the busses and they got in contact with my driver (whom I believe was in contact with them, but there wasn't a link between me and my mother yet).
She simply told them where to go and the driver got me there. A little fuss and I'm sure I was scared, but a simple phone call from those who knew where I was supposed to be and I was there shortly after.
GPS, cell phones, computers as we know them, the internet as we know it, etc, etc, etc, didn't exist. Yet I got home safe that day.
Sometimes you CAN trust the system to work. Just be informed as to when and where your child was supposed to be and you can pick up the trail quickly. Even if my mother wasn't going to find out about the incident for a while and I was stranded longer, I have no doubt the school would have looked up records and figure it all out on their own. At least they would have explored contacting the "contacts" list in my file, etc.
If it was a malicious attempt to abduct me, I don't even think a cell/tracker would have helped. Pretty sure someone will confiscate that quickly.
While I like the idea of being as succinct and efficient as possible with your code, at what point does it become fruitless?
Obviously, if you're testing your code on a "new" workstation and it's sluggish, you'll find ways to make it work better. But if it works well? What boss is going to pay you to work on a project for no real benefit other than to point out it is very efficient?
I started to laugh. Then began to realize how sad it is that it's true.
How about my girlfriend who likes TV and Facebook a bit more than the average person? I mean, that's gotta be a new mental illness. Probably easily treatable with a $300 bottle of pills from the big pharma's right?
Every time a bear, moose, mouse, dog, cat, etc, does its thing, that waste gets filtered and flushed down streams and rivers into lakes and other bodies of water. Some of it is filtered down into Aquifers as well.
Hell, your sewage is merely treated and released back into the environment.
Where did people think all of that went? Into some large holding tank labeled as Biohazard and buried?
Keeping a conspiracy under wraps is near impossible. The only way you can reasonably assure it won't be leaked is if everyone in on it is 100% vested and has no reason to go astray.
I'm not saying there aren't people out there trying to push large conspiratorial agendas, because I'm sure there are. I'm just saying I don't think they can hire all who it would take to make it really work and not have a leak somewhere that blows the plan.
Hmm, relationship advice from a Slashdot poster. Sure, I'll take it "under advisement".
What's personal opinion when you can just follow the call of the media outlets!
What's funny is, my girlfriend is begging me to go see it this week. No, she's no Trekkie at all. But what is interesting is that over the weekend she took out my Generations DVD and wanted to watch it.
I've been trying to get her to watch it a little bit with me here and there but no dice. One new heavily hyped movie comes out and all of a sudden she wants to start watching it.
Either way I win, I just find it odd that it took major media outlets hyping/loving it before she would touch it.
I have a feeling a lot of people will see this sort of thing happening. But again, not complaining. It would be GREAT if the Star Trek fan base could be reinvigorated!
Kids, smart or not, are still kids. I'd hate to see her lose out on her childhood.
However, I have issues with the coloring book and I'm mostly glad it was removed.
In my opinion, 9/11 is still a very large and very sore subject for many people. I believe the little fly-by stunt the government pulled this week proves that. However, that's not the direct reason I think the book was "off color" (forgive the pun).
I was speaking with my girlfriend and we're in agreement. Children, especially children that are at the age where coloring books are a learning aid really don't need to be exposed to the details of 9/11. Frankly, most children barely understand that different people live in different parts of the world. The U.S. is a big enough place with enough demographics to keep a kids mind chugging out questions for quite some time.
Children coloring in planes flying and blowing up into buildings won't mean squat to them. The word "Terrorist" is basically just another word for "bad" or "stranger". The meaning of what happened and what it means is entirely lost on a child.
Think of it this way, I can't see explaining to a child (of coloring book age) what really happened on 9/11. What is a coloring book really going to teach them then?
I don't know, rambling a bit here, but I just don't see the point in coloring in 9/11 imagery. If you want children to learn about 9/11, show them news footage and witness accounts. Then teach about the politics and religions that led up to the event and what happened afterwards (in response to and the just because's). But kids of that age, again, really aren't ready (as a whole) to be told, let alone understand, what really happened.
Regardless of what you may think, Wars, Nazis, 9/11, etc, just simply aren't coloring book material. Lets keep kids coloring books to Spongebob and Animals. When they are old enough to understand and respect what happened, then they can be exposed.
All this is of course from a schooling perspective. If you want to teach your kids about the realities of the world at home at whatever age you choose, please feel free!
Aren't Judges supposed to remove themselves from a case if there is a known conflict of interest or an arguable bias? Don't they get in trouble for presiding over cases with this bias?
Maybe someone with a background in law can answer this? Google didn't seem to want to give any definitive answers. Then again, maybe the laws in Sweden are different?
Why are these sensitive systems connected to the public internet. Either directly or indirectly, whose bright idea was it? If you need a computer in the lab connected to the internet, fine, just keep the infrastructure seperate.
It's causing quite the health epidemic. It's amazing how it was once popular and even fun! Now, it's known to be a carcinogen and causes other diseases.
Wait.. games.. right? We're talking about video games here? And what the @#$@ is "violent" anyways? Anything that shows any blood? Anything to do with guns? How about anything that depicts fighting or harsh language? How about any game where anything at all is killed?
Goombas, the genocide of Goombas. That's pretty f'ing violent. Better double, wait.. we are already taxed on the sale, plus a sin tax, so triple tax Super Mario Brothers.
Lets just go ahead and ban anything that happens outside of Church and Eating meals with the family. Crap, aren't there some churches that aren't quite, *cough* wholesome as well? Little boy fondlers and all (no matter how rare). Oh and bad stuff happens in the home in some cases as well, so we should strike that too. Let alone any entertainment that has obviously been **PROVEN** to cause violent behavior in, well, anyone.
WTF am I even talking about anymore? I'm making about as much sense as these god damn politicians now.
But what's got me worried is the fact that when I started playing around on the internet, the most heavy web surfing was a few gifs and/or jpgs.
Now, we have full flash animations, games, interactive multimedia presentations. Not to mention embedded audio and video.
Downloads use to be smaller as well. Now with more bandwidth available, software gets bundled with more features and more multimedia. Game demos have gone from 10-20 meg up to 500meg to 2+ gig, easy.
Hell, I'm a legit user, I don't download music (anymore, I did when I was younger) and I don't pull pirated movies/software either. I don't run bittorrent except for the occasional WoW update (when I did play). But I've seen a large jump in bandwidth usage with my new Roku box for watching NetFlix on my tv. That's a lot of streaming video. Are they keeping tech like this in mind? Doubt it.
So, say the caps are aimed at the bandwidth of today, ok, fine. What happens "tomorrow" when demos START at 2gig+? What happens when the only video online starts at widescreen HD? Our bandwidth usage, for simple surfing, has been going up. It would be shortsighted to think it won't keep going up. If the companies with hard established caps don't keep growing your cap, you're going to eventually have to pay for the top tier.
Bandwidth usage inflates with time. I'm not holding my breath that the ISP's will generously increase caps over time.
Nice try you government propagandist! We see through your guise!
Slashdot is known for being a terrorist hotbed of activity.
Seriously though, is it getting just so utterly bullshit that they list Slashdot as a potential terrorist hangout? I mean, really? Is the government this god damned stupid? I suppose in the back of my mind I always knew it was, but wow.
I don't want to come off as a nutjob here, but this country is falling down hard. A new revolution in the next 100 years appears to be more than possible at this point. Laws are getting absolutely ridiculous.
I realize VA is far from the federal government, but this "OMG EVERY1 IZ TERRORIZT!" stuff is getting really scary.
Terrorist.. This decades Communist.. Make lists and round 'em up, boys!
Fucking scary.
2-3 advil was able to subdue the pain and I can't recall feeling tired.
Now, I substitute soda with water and when I need something with flavor I hit the Hi-C and Koolaid. (Make it at home with only 1/2 the called for sugar, still tastes great!).
Now, I'm not tired at all. In the AM at work (8am), I have a hot chocolate with breakfast for a little sugar wake up and I'm good until my 11pm bedtime.
I won't say I feel healthier or better in any way, but I know that not putting all that crap into my system every day is probably doing more good than harm (comparatively). So that's the plus I keep sustaining.
I also have no care in the world to go back either. Coke tastes great! But the money I save (albeit little) and knowing I'll probably be better off in the long run just seems better than Coke.
To each his own though.
I don't see it that way at all. It sounds like that on the surface, but I don't think it's like that at all.
Take a society without guns (zero, none whatsoever) and put 1 gun into the hands of one side of an argument and 1 gun into the hands of the other side. Both sides are smart enough that they know using the gun would mean the other guy would.
So, what's the problem here, now there are lots of guys without guns and they want them. Sounds like you should give everyone who wants them because we're responsible, so they should be too. I mean, it's too powerful and everyone respects that fact.
So lets give them to everyone, hell if everyone has them, and noone uses them, well, nothing changes....
No.. If you just hand out weapons, or just allow everyone to make them at their own will, eventually one guy will end up with one and he will want to use it. Eventually it gets into the hands of a crazy. N. Korea might not be the crazy guy, but he sure as shit isn't the sane guy.
Yes, it sounds hypocritical, but if enough people have weapons, eventually someone will use them. That is what we want to avoid.
I'm not one that believes in using nuclear weapons, but not having them seems worse than having them.
Ya, I know, pretty easy to say when I'm in one of the countries with a crapton of them (US).
You're not a normal user, at all.
Even if you're sending Pictures, that's a crapload. If that's just text, I don't even want to know how many hours you spend typing to hit 5gig.
Pretty sure if the fire department is coming in to throw water lines around, they are going to cut the power to the building and not to just the circuit on the datacenter floor.
I could be mistaken, but I don't think a 12 volt battery backup in these applications are going to pose much of a "life" risk. Obviously you don't want to put your tongue on the terminals, but I don't think they pose the same threat that the power lines under the floor do.
I think it's fair to point out to everyone that even on an untouched planet, major changes can happen. It's the nature of planets.
I'm not saying humans aren't causing changes on earth, because, well, they ARE. But this just goes to show that even if we don't do anything to influence change, it still happens.
Change isn't necessarily a bad thing, it's just something that happens. Sometimes it happens and it's bad for our type of life and that sucks.
Every now and again, I get this feeling that the masses don't understand that planets evolve, even on their own. If humans never came to be, the earth would still be changing on it's own.